February 8, 2018
“…Just listen to how he allows Meyer to respond in his own words! It’s shocking.
Meyer explained that “god of the gaps” arguments fail to convince because they are arguments from ignorance. Such arguments “occur when evidence against a proposition is offered as the sole grounds for accepting an alternative position.” For instance: Evolution cannot explain this part of life, ergo there must be a designer.
Intelligent design does not work like this, the author argued. “Proponents of intelligent design infer design because we know that intelligent agents can and do produce specified information-rich systems,” Meyer wrote. “Indeed, we have positive, experience-based knowledge of an alternative cause sufficient to have produced the effect in question — and that cause is intelligence or mind.”
ID proponents like Meyer point out that even the most basic forms of life are remarkably complex. Each organism’s genetic code carries digital information remarkably similar to the kind of computer code humans invented using their minds.
Furthermore, Meyer pointed to the work of Douglas Axe, a biologist whose experiments revealed “that for every one DNA sequence that generates a short functional protein of just 150 amino acids in length, there are 1077 non-functional combinations — that is, 1077 amino acid arrangements that will not fold into a stable three-dimensional protein structure capable of performing a biological function.”
Random chance acting through the laws of nature has not been demonstrated to create this kind of complexity…”