Intelligent Design and the Eye?

Question

One arument if favour of Intelligent Design I often read is that certain features, such as the eye, are too complex to have arisen by natural means.

But such complex features are arising all the time - every new baby of a species that has eyes - by entirely natural means. If the ID argument is sound should we not posit that every new baby is intelligently designed? In which case would this refute current biological theories about eggs, DNA, gestation etc etc the "theory of reproduction"?

It seems to me either that:
1. Yes, you have to reject the "theory of reproduction" or
2.. Intelligent Design is compatible with the "theory of reproduction"

If "2" then you have to ask yourself what ID is actually saying and have to work pretty hard to get it to exclude evolution. Evolution may be wrong but it would not be ID that showed it to be so and another naturalist explanation of the changes in life forms would be immune to criticism by ID.

So IDers - which is it 1 or 2?

Answer 1

The science of reproduction and DNA cannot be refuted, but it must be understood that nothing happens without God. Reproduction is a creative process and God never stops creating. Evolution is a defunct theory.

Answer 2

"Let us get real, theories are provable in a laboratory and go into forming stated laws after having proven that a certain set of trials with a certain perameters are met where a certain outcome is produced on a regular basis to form a hypothesis, thus after the trials continue and the studying of the hypothesis it becomes a theory, after continuous studying the theory and the practicum normalities and abnormalities are shown to be constant and all the trials come out the same product, then it becomes a scientific law."

I'd just like to comment on this complete misunderstanding of scientific theory.

There are very few scientific laws, and most of the time you hear a 'scientific law' being discussed it is only really a theory.

An example:
Newton's Law of Universal Gravitation was a scientific theory that was called a law. In the 20th Century it was replaced by Einstein's Theory of General Relativity. In recent years it was proved that the facts fit Einstein's theory and not Newton's. But this still does not make Einstein's Theory a scientific law.

To be a law it has to be proven to never be wrong. And this is very difficult for obvious reasons. Most of the science we rely on in modern life is 'only' theory.

A scientific theory is constantly tested and can relatively safely be treated as fact. Evolution is a scientific theory that has been tested and developed for a very long time. Intelligent Design (and Creationism) is not a scientific theory.

Answer 3

Intelligent design is just "Creationist Lite".

It suggests that evolution happened, but was given the occasional helping hand by some higher being.

At least full Creationism is consistent in its arguments and its denial of evidence - Intelligent Design is a muddled theory that seems to want to haphazardly take evidence that may or may not be relevant and seeks to ignore any evidence that contradicts it. Intelligent design is "Creationism for wimps"

What would be wrong with the idea that God created the universe 15 billion years ago by initiating the Big Bang and things have evolved since then? It's not what I believe, but it reconciles the higher being as creator together with the scientific evidence.

Answer 4

Intelligent Design is founded on the idea that that some systems are "irreducibly complex", in other words, could not operate in a simpler form. No irreducibly complex biological system has never been identified.

This site contains a better explanation of the gradual development of the eye in a format I cannot match.

Answer 5

If you could answer every question with the right answers of Intelligent Design hypothesis as opposed to evolutionary hypothesis, neither one are theories!

Let us get real, theories are provable in a laboratory and go into forming stated laws after having proven that a certain set of trials with a certain perameters are met where a certain outcome is produced on a regular basis to form a hypothesis, thus after the trials continue and the studying of the hypothesis it becomes a theory, after continuous studying the theory and the practicum normalities and abnormalities are shown to be constant and all the trials come out the same product, then it becomes a scientific law.

Neither intelligent design or evolution meet this criteria they are in fact models to which we may asses which "model" best fits the data.

So in the bottom line both are religions for both have belief systems that their ideas are right and correct over the others. Though no "scientific laboratory" examples can be done to prove each one. God does not perform for scientists nor will evolution produce a man that turns into a god.

Answer 6

Michael Behe (author of identification) has shown that he accepts evolution, as a effect the at latest analyzing might desire to propose 2. besides the undeniable fact that the identification bandwagon is totally adept at quote mining and taking issues out of context to propose regardless of they like them to propose. after all study shows that eyes have stepped forward interior the animal kingdom on a minimum of four seperate occaisions.

Answer 7

There is no intelligence behind the emergence of the eye. There is sufficient evidence to show how a complex system like vision evolved over millions of years, from light sensitive cells on microscopic worms to several versions of complex eyes in higher animals.

Answer 8

If the human body is so intelligently-designed, then why is it so incompatible with it's environment? It's pretty easy to damage, has plenty of points of vulnerability, a million different vectors for disease and decrepitude and has silly-looking tackle.

So in answer to your question, intelligent design is bunk.

Answer 9

The argument about the human eye having 'irreducible complexity' is an old one but it is very easily countered. See below...

Answer 10

I think 2. I am going to have a lie down now!