Eräs PandasThumbin kommentoija keräsi kasaan olennaiset lainaukset ID-teorian nykytilasta:
William D[e]mbski, 2002:
As for your example, I’m not going to take the bait. You’re asking me to play a game: “Provide as much detail in terms of possible causal mechanisms for your ID position as I do for my Darwinian position.” ID is not a mechanistic theory, and it’s not ID’s task to match your pathetic level of detail in telling mechanistic stories.
Paul Nelson, 2004:
Easily the biggest challenge facing the ID community is to develop a full-fledged theory of biological design. We don’t have such a theory now, and that’s a real problem. Without a theory, it’s very hard to know where to direct your research focus. Right now, we’ve got a bag of powerful intuitions, and a handful of notions such as “irreducible complexity” and “specified complexity” –- but, as yet, no general theory of biological design.
Jonathan Wells, 2007:
“I don’t think I’m obligated to propose an alternate theory,” Wells publicly stated. “I don’t pretend to have an alternate theory that explains the history of life.”
Behe in the vise:
(Rothschild)Q. And I’m correct when I asked you, you would need to see a step-by-step description of how the immune system, vertebrate immune system developed?
(Behe)A. Not only would I need a step-by-step, mutation by mutation analysis, I would also want to see relevant information such as what is the population size of the organism in which these mutations are occurring, what is the selective value for the mutation, are there any detrimental effects of the mutation, and many other such questions.
Q. And you haven’t undertaken to try and figure out those?
A. I am not confident that the immune system arose through Darwinian processes, and so I do not think that such a study would be fruitful.
Q. It would be a waste of time?
A. It would not be fruitful.
International Society for Complexity, Information, and Design:
Contact Information
ISCID66 Witherspoon Street, Suite 1800Princeton, NJ 08542
609-924-4424 (general)
"The essay contests at ISCID have been cancelled, the conferences have been cancelled, the student workshops have been cancelled, the online chats have been cancelled. The ID ‘journal’ hasn’t put anything out since 2005. I’ve emailed two different ‘editors’ of that journal, asking when the next issue was coming. No response. So I just dialed that phone number. After it rang for a while, a fax machine tried to pick up.
As far as I can tell, the only thing the IDers actually do, is blog."
Eikä moisten tunnustusten tuottaminen ole mihinkään kadonnut. Esimerkiksi tässä linkki tuoreeseen William Dembskin lausuntoon:
ReplyDeletehttp://www.metanexus.net/metanexus_online/show_article2.asp?id=9819
Josta voimme napata tiedon siitä miten poliittinen PR -liike ID oikeasti on:
"This book grant was launched at an early stage in both the evolution of the John Templeton Foundation and also the evolution of the Intelligent Design Movement. There were certainly sympathies towards aspects of the ID arguments and interest in pushing the technical and theological sides of their inquiry, but as the ID Theory became a political movement, the John Templeton Foundation began to slowly--perhaps too slowly--to disassociate itself from the Discovery Institute, William Dembski, and other protagonists in the debate."
Ed Brayton pitää kommenttia harvinaisen rehellisenä:
http://scienceblogs.com/dispatches/2007/03/templeton_answers_dembski.php