Signature of Controversy: Responses to Critics of Signature in the Cell

Notwithstanding the offenses heaped upon opponents of Darwinism, the Discovery Institute, Intelligent Design, and specifically the book of the controversy, "Signature in the Cell", and its author, Stephen C. Meyer, their defenders manage to largely abstain from such offenses and engage more pertinently, especially in the present case, in careful argumentation, absent in many disputes.There is a strong emphasis on correcting accusations of "Creationism" and other "unscientific" approaches, by highlighting as one of Dr. Meyer's chief forms of argument (in his own words) "the method of inferring to the best explanation", which "necessarily requires an examination of the main competing hypotheses that scientists have proposed to explain a given event" (p.18). This is indeed a dominant, "hypothetico-deductive", scientific method, used by Darwin as well, with probabilistic problems. A drawback is its near fallacy of "affirming the consequent", ((A implies B) does not imply (B implies A)). That is why hypotheses, predicting known occurrences, are always subject to change.In any event, Dr. Meyer makes in his book "a positive case for intelligent design by showing that the activity of conscious and rational agents is the only known cause by which large amounts of new functional information arise" (p.19). Expressions like "functional information", related to "information-bearing properties of DNA", sound a little too vague to me. "Information" in DNA is admittedly a metaphor, since one can simply speak of causation, and "functional" can likewise apply to causes, functioning in producing certain effects. But the argument is sound, by concerning the functional forms of organisms in the sense that they function to attain certain purposes. And "the activity of conscious and rational agents is the only known cause" of objects in our world that function to attain certain purposes.We are dealing of course with man-made, inanimate, objects, and it may be questioned whether the same rules apply to the animate, the living. As a matter of fact, the animate is rather decisive in this respect, as I have endeavored to demonstrate, if with listeners not inclined to "think outside the box". The box is the "natural-explanation" mindset, which limits causes (e.g. pp.109-110) to "undirected", "unguided", physical or chemical forces. No one considers "directed" forces as part of nature; they would be relegated to the supernatural. Prominently the former, to be sure, are our own directed, purposeful, actions. But this is dismissed as somehow a result of "blind" Darwinian forces, mysteriously unexplained.There is much more though to the "directed", "guided", in nature. Not only our actions are directed, but so are the activities of our bodies. They are obviously known to be directed toward the goal of self-preservation, as are activities in all organisms, making them alive. There is accordingly no need to seek unobserved guidance, purpose, in the functional structure of organisms. The guidance is observed in their behavior, aimed at survival, which is correspondingly also responsible for their adaptation, refuting "unguided" natural selection.Allow me to also mention the matter of reviews and accompanying items on Amazon (p.53). I understand too well the feelings generated by "abusive 'reviews' making...little pretense of having turned a single page", etc. I fare much worse then what I see concerning Dr. Meyer's book. Overlooking the attacks on him, he is a well-respected member of a large constituency widely sharing his views. I have myself a book featured on Amazon, and of 4 "reviews" only one writer saw the book, with a favorable result. The other writers were displeased with my reviews and comments, of which I do many, regarding other books. They engage in the nastiest behavior, including "tags" that are meant to characterize my book and have nothing to do with it. Ironically, they associate me with the Discovery Institute, although I am a totally independent thinker, as may be gleaned from the above.

Nobody is permitted to utter a discouraging word about naturalism accounting for the rise of all life from the elements without being savagely and arrogantly attacked by biologists such as Francisco Ayala, a University of California, Irvine, biologist, and of course Richard Dawkins, the world renowned atheist who famously stated, "Anybody who doesn't believe in evolution is either ignorant, stupid, insane, or wicked." This book follows Signature In The Cell, which makes a most compelling case for some very sophisticated intelligence having created the first living, reproducing organism. Ayala pretended to have read the book but betrays his own ignorance and laziness from the outset by misquoting its very title, which he called "Signature OF the Cell." Ayala and other critics of SITC misstated the contents, the representations, and a good deal more. While these critics use the word "science" very loosely, alas they do not PRACTICE science very well at all.The book is necessarily technical and difficult to understand much less appreciate. But it does serve as an effective rebuttal to all who demand that naturalism and only naturalism is both necessary and sufficient to explain the biosphere, much less the entire universe. The fantasmagoric pretense of an infinite number of universes outside of our own may appear from time to time, but should not be given a second thought by any objective, thinking individual.

This book was like taking a college class in microbiology, yet it was a very good read. I could understand it very fast because of the way the author used analogies to everyday things. I think it's a must read for anyone interested in what DNA is all about. You can learn the history of the search for how genetic information is passed on, and understand easily why there is more to this universe than Energy and Matter interacting randomly over immense time. There is another entity we call, "Information", which is distinct from Energy and Matter, but just as elemental. I loved the analogy about those plastic letters with the magnets that we stick on the refrigerator. Maybe you can accept the extremely high improbability of the letters being formed naturally over immense time, just from the interaction of energy and matter. But, when you see them all forming an understandable sentence without errors or extras, you know that communication of Information took the intervention of intelligence. So clearly, Intelligence is not just a mixture of Energy and Matter over time. Read this book.

As long as humans have opinions, there will be disagreements over anything. This book is a great answer to those who oppose Intelligent Design saying it is religion in disguise. The writer(s) make clear that the opponents of ID are guilty of doing so because of their belief system (religion?!) as are some of its proponents. This book also shows that not only Christians are in the ID movement, but people of other faiths as well; so to call ID people Creationists (which is a Christian ministry) is incorrect. Recommended for believers and non-believers who are honestly seeking the truth.

Argue though we may ... Darwinism absolutely is NOT "settled science." There are simply to many loose, unsupported claims and gaps, in addition to the famous "missing links." In the age of DNA, genomics and epi-genomics this last statement couldn't be more brutally evident. This book does a masterful job of describing just "some" of the problems with Modern Darwinism and how they may, one day, be resolved. Whether you are a creationist, atheist or something in-between, as long as you possess an open mind, this book will open your eyes to the multi-facets of the debate from both perspectives and points of view.

excellent

thank you very much, everything was like you described