Evolutionists Admit that Intelligent Design is Science

Evolutionists have maintained for years that the theory of intelligent design was not science because it could not be tested. They were wrong of course, but for a long while they kept up the charade in an effort to squash competing ideas. It did not work. The theory of intelligent design has gained adherents.

In a turn around, scientists are now conducting experiments with results which they believe argues against the theory of intelligent design. Too much of their prior evidence for evolution consisted of data which could equally be interpreted as evidence for intelligent design. Now they are conducting experiments which try to confirm one and disprove another.

One class of evidence for Intelligent Design is a concept called "irreducible complexity". The idea is that many of the thousands of molecular machines operating in each of our cells could not perform their assigned function if they were any less complex than they are. This argues against the idea that those machines built up by a series of evolutionary steps. IF the whole machine is not in place from the start, the function does not get performed.

The actual data found by the scientists concerns a single complex machine in our cells mitochondria. Scientists believe that these mitochondria were once a type of tiny cell that merged with larger cells. They examined the tiny cells that they believe became mitochondria and found many molecules similar to the "parts" in the complex molecular machine in the mitochondria. To them, this indicates that the complex machine evolved, since they found the parts for the machine in what they believe to be the mitochondrial ancestor.

As an adherent of Intelligent Design, I am more excited that those hard-heads finally admit that Intelligent Design is science, that it can be tested for to at least the same extent macro-evolution can be tested for. I am not disturbed by their results. For one thing, there are thousands of molecular machines in every cell, a large slice of which appear to be irreducibly complex. Knocking one off that list is hardly a death blow to the theory. In addition, they have not even done what they think they have. The concept of irreducible complexity requires that there be no simpler way for the machine to perform ITS CURRENT FUNCTION. Just because parts of the machine can be used for other functions does not mean that it is any easier for them to evolve into their current function by a series of small steps. The whole point of IR is that the NEW FUNCTION can't be done by anything less than the whole new machine. That all the evolving of the machine is useless until the machine is complete.

The evos discovery on this one is akin to saying that a car engine was not produced by intelligent design, and the proof they have is that a bolt used hold on a head gasket has also been found to secure a mirror on a wall in the house.