Intelligent Design
Dr. Heinz Lycklama
heinz@osta.com
www.osta.com
All truth passes through three stages:
1. Ridicule
2. Violent opposition
3. Self-evident acceptance.
Arthur Schopenhauer
Chance, Necessity or Design?
@ Dr. Heinz Lycklama
Intelligent Design
What is it?
History of “Intelligent Design”
Key movers and shakers
Irreducible complexity
Specified complexity
Testing for complexity
Arguments for a designer
More examples of design
Intelligent Design v. Creationism
@ Dr. Heinz Lycklama
What is Intelligent Design?
"The theory of intelligent design holds that
certain features of the universe and of living
things are best explained by an intelligent
cause, not an undirected process such as
natural selection."
Source: The Discovery Institute
The leaders in the ID movement purposely do not
equate the intelligent cause with God;
moreover, they are agnostic on the issue of
the age of the earth and of the universe
@ Dr. Heinz Lycklama
Scientific Creationism Propositions
There was a sudden creation of the universe, energy
and life from nothing
Mutations and natural selection lack ability to
develop all living kinds from a single organism
Changes of the originally created kinds of plants
and animals occur only within fixed limits
There is a separate ancestry for humans and apes
Earth’s geology can be explained by catastrophism,
primarily by the occurrence of a worldwide flood
Earth and living kinds had a relatively recent
beginning (6000 -> 10,000 years ago)
@ Dr. Heinz Lycklama
Intelligent Design Propositions
Specified complexity and irreducible complexity
are reliable indications of design
Biological systems exhibit specified complexity
and use irreducibly complex subsystems
Naturalistic mechanisms or undirected causes do
not suffice to explain origin of complexity
Intelligent design constitutes the best explanation
for the origin of specified complexity and
irreducible complexity in biological systems
@ Dr. Heinz Lycklama
Evidence for Design
Cosmology: evidence suggests the
universe--including all matter, space, time,
and energy--came suddenly into existence a
finite time ago, contradicting the picture of an
eternal and self-existing material cosmos
Physics: evidence has shown that the
universe is "finely-tuned" for the existence of
life, suggesting the work, as Astrophysicist
Fred Hoyle puts it, "of a super-intellect”
@ Dr. Heinz Lycklama
Evidence for Design - 2
Biology: the presence of complex and
functionally integrated machines has cast
doubt on Darwinian mechanisms of self-
assembly
Molecular biology: the presence of
information encoded along the DNA
molecule has suggested the activity of a
prior designing intelligence
Harvard biologist Richard Lewontin urges
scientists to embrace a "materialism [that] is
absolute" and to stick with "material explanations,
no matter how counter intuitive."
@ Dr. Heinz Lycklama
History of Intelligent Design
Greek philosophers a few
100 years before Christ
Some early church fathers
in 3rd/4th centuries
William Paley, Natural Theology (1802)
Watch is the product of intelligence (watchmaker),
not the result of undirected natural processes
Organisms (e.g. the eye) are the product of
intelligence
Purposeful design -> purposeful designer
Important sign of design is complexity
@ Dr. Heinz Lycklama
An Early Argument From Design
Rev. William Paley in Natural Theology, 1802:
"In crossing a heath, suppose I pitched my foot against a stone
and were asked how the stone came to be there, I might
possibly answer that for anything I knew to the contrary it had
lain there forever; nor would it, perhaps, be very easy to show
the absurdity of this answer. But suppose I had found a watch
upon the ground, and it should be inquired how the watch
happened to be in that place, I should hardly think of the
answer which I had before given, that for anything I knew the
watch might have always been there. Yet why should not this
answer serve for the watch as well as for the stone? For this
reason, and none other, viz., that when we come to inspect
the watch, we perceive what we could not discover in the
stone, that its several parts were put together for a purpose."
@ Dr. Heinz Lycklama
Modern Intelligent Design (ID)
Began with the work of Charles Thaxton, Walter
Bradley, Michael Denton, Dean Kenyon and
Phillip Johnson
Scientifically, Darwinism is an inadequate
framework for biology
Philosophically, Darwinism is hopelessly entangled
with naturalism
Michael Behe, William Dembski, Stephen Meyer,
Paul Nelson and Jonathan Wells
Proposed positive research program wherein
intelligent causes become key for understanding the
diversity and complexity of life
@ Dr. Heinz Lycklama
Some Influential ID Books
The Mystery of Life’s Origin, Charles Thaxton
et. al. in 1984
A Theory in Crisis, Michael Denton in 1986
Darwin on Trial, Phillip Johnson in 1991
Creation Hypothesis, Dean Kenyon in 1994
Reason in the Balance, Phillip Johnson in 1995
Darwin’s Black Box, Michael Behe in 1996
The Design Inference, William Dembski in 1999
Icons of Evolution, Jonathan Wells in 2000
The Design Revolution, William Dembski in 2004
@ Dr. Heinz Lycklama
Can Evolution be Proved in a Courtroom?
A Lawyer’s Perspective
Phillip E. Johnson
Jefferson E. Peyser
Professor of Law
School of Law
University of California, Berkeley
http://www.arn.org/johnson/johome.htm
Published in 1991
@ Dr. Heinz Lycklama
Johnson’s Critique Spreads
This 1994 collection
of philosophers,
physicists,
astronomers,
chemists, biologists,
and linguists
critiqued Darwinism
and promoted
Intelligent Design
@ Dr. Heinz Lycklama
Johnson’s Influence Leads to
1996 Conference
This conference at Biola
University brought scholars
from around the world
The world learns of the
Discovery Institute’s Center for
the Renewal of Science and
Culture (CRSC).
@ Dr. Heinz Lycklama
Darwin’s Black Box
Lehigh U. biochemistry
professor, Mike Behe’s 1996
book was reviewed in
mainline science journals.
For the first time Darwinists
only argued with his
conclusions, not his facts.
CT’s 1996 Book of the Year.
@ Dr. Heinz Lycklama
Irreducible Complexity
Mike Behe introduced the concept of
irreducible complexity in his book,
Darwin’s Black Box
Something is irreducibly complex if it is
composed of two or more necessary parts
Remove one part and function is not just
impaired but destroyed
A mousetrap is irreducibly complex
@ Dr. Heinz Lycklama
The Mousetrap
•A mousetrap cannot be built by natural selection
@ Dr. Heinz Lycklama
The Mousetrap – An Explanation
“An everyday example of an irreducibly complex
system is the humble mousetrap. It consists of (1) a
flat wooden platform or base; (2) a metal hammer,
which crushes the mouse; (3) a spring with extended
ends to power the hammer; (4) a catch that releases
the spring; and (5) a metal bar that connects to the
catch and holds the hammer back. You can't catch a
mouse with just a platform, then add a spring and
catch a few more mice, then add a holding bar and
catch a few more. All the pieces have to be in place
before you catch any mice.”
Michael Behe - 2002
@ Dr. Heinz Lycklama
“Irreducible Complexity”
“By irreducibly complex I mean a single system
composed of several well-matched, interacting parts
that contribute to the basic function, wherein the
removal of any one of the parts causes the system to
effectively cease functioning
An irreducibly complex system cannot be produced
directly... by slight, successive modifications of a
precursor system, because any precursor to an
irreducibly complex system that is missing a part is by
definition nonfunctional”
Michael Behe, Darwin’s Black Box, p. 39.
@ Dr. Heinz Lycklama
Johnson and Behe Meet the Press
Both Behe and Johnson began speaking
and debating on major university
campuses
Both also began writing articles and
editorials for the WSJ, Washington Post
and other major media outlets
Johnson appeared on Nightline
@ Dr. Heinz Lycklama
William Dembski
Bill Dembski publishes
The Design Inference
in 1999 with the
prestigious Cambridge
University Press.
Bill has earned
doctorates in
philosophy and
mathematics and an
M.Div. from Princeton.
@ Dr. Heinz Lycklama
1999 Is a Pivotal Year
Kansas Board of Education reduces the
influence of naturalism in high school biology
standards
Education and scientific establishments vastly
overreact
Johnson, Behe, Dembski, and others are
published widely, exposing the naturalistic
bias of science and media
Darwinists only repeat tired, predictable
science vs. religion arguments
@ Dr. Heinz Lycklama
Year 2000
Dembski publishes
Intelligent Design
Major conferences at
Baylor, Concordia College
in Wisconsin, and Yale.
Media and scientific
community focus even
more attention on Kansas.
@ Dr. Heinz Lycklama
Year 2000
@ Dr. Heinz Lycklama
Intelligent Design Theory
Living organisms are too complicated to be the
result of natural processes working
independently
Based largely on the theories underlying
Information Theory
Concerned with measuring the complexity of
structures/information contained in structures
Generally concerned with two main concepts:
Irreducible complexity
Specified complexity
@ Dr. Heinz Lycklama
Specific Complexity
The following strings of characters illustrate the concept of
Specific Complexity.
Consider the following:
Complex but unspecified:
“fjbn ghtur ieiod ofjkgjbn mfkritj”
Complex and specified:
“The state of education in America”
@ Dr. Heinz Lycklama
Intelligent Design
“Intelligent Design” (ID) takes intelligence
to be a separate principle, not reducible to
chance and necessity.
Targets evolution: life exhibits a special
kind of order, not like that of a snowflake
but like that of a meaningful message.
Sophisticated anti-evolution. No Bible-
thumping. Philosophical.
@ Dr. Heinz Lycklama
ID: A Separate Principle
Chance
Design
Necessity
@ Dr. Heinz Lycklama
“Irreducible Complexity”
1996: Michael Behe, Lehigh
biochemist. Leading ID
biologist. Catholic.
Common descent OK––
against Darwinian mechanism.
Can’t get “irreducible
complexity.”
@ Dr. Heinz Lycklama
“Specified complexity”
1998-now: William Dembski,
mathematician and philosopher.
Leading theorist of ID.
ID irreducible form of
explanation, distinct from
chance & necessity.
ID is a revolution.
@ Dr. Heinz Lycklama
Books, Books, More Books
• Dembski has 3 books, 4+
edited books on ID
• Not just biology but
physics, AI, theology,
morality, law, …
• Broad, “information-
theoretic” objections to
naturalistic evolution
@ Dr. Heinz Lycklama
Dembski’s claims
Both designed artifacts and organisms
exhibit special order: specified complexity
Chance and necessity cannot generate
Specified Complexity, or information
Intelligence is a separate principle
Blind mechanisms (like those of Darwinian
evolution) cannot explain life
Artificial Intelligence is impossible
@ Dr. Heinz Lycklama
How To Detect Specified Complexity
Contingency: No physical Günaydinlar!
constraint; all sorts of strings can Bugün hava iyi,
appear on the paper
ancak yarin daha
Complexity: Improbable to
obtain by pure chance kötü olacak gibi.
Specification: Can’t read it, but Bulut çok, ama ne
fits properties of a language, yapar, belli degil.
priorly known
DNA also a code…
@ Dr. Heinz Lycklama
Testing for Design
Günaydinlar!
Bu gün h ava iyi,
anca k yarin daha
contingency
kötü ol aca k gib i.
contingency m1m 2
Bu lut çok, ama ne F G
yapar,b el li degil. r
12
complexity
specifi-
cation
@ Dr. Heinz Lycklama
Start William Dembski’s
Explanatory Filter
Highly
probable? Yes Law
No
Intermediate
probability? Yes Chance
No
Specified/
Small probability? Yes Design
No
From Mere Creation: Science, Faith and Intelligent
Design. William A. Dembski Ed. Downers Grove,
Chance Illinois: InterVarsity Press, 1998. P99.
@ Dr. Heinz Lycklama
Is The
Pattern
Random Or
Designed?
Probability:
=2-256
=8.6 x 10-78
=0.0000000000
0000000000000
0000000000000
0000000000000
0000000000000
0000000000000
0086 @ Dr. Heinz Lycklama
Is The
Pattern
Random Or
Designed?
Probability:
=2-256
=8.6 x 10-78
=0.0000000000
0000000000000
0000000000000
0000000000000
0000000000000
0000000000000
0086 @ Dr. Heinz Lycklama
Arguments for a Designer
Organisms look designed for at least three reasons:
Redundancy - A Designer can engineer redundancy into a
system, but chance is unlikely to do this. An example of this is
the presence of degeneracy in the genetic code and other
features that minimize or negate the effects of many point
mutations
Excess potential - Organisms have potential that may never
be used. For example, Wallace, co-discoverer of natural
selection, pointed out that primitive people have the capacity to
do calculus when trained. Natural selection is unlikely to select
for capacity that is not used
Complexity - Life exhibits a kind of complexity that it is hard
to produce by processes involving chance
Design and Deductive Reasoning
In general, arguments for a designer are arguments
against the alternative. This does not mean these are
just arguments against evolutionary theory. All
arguments, by definition, are characterized by taking
one side while arguing against another side
Arguments against a theory are about eliminating
possible explanations. There is nothing inferior
about this, in fact, it is deductive reasoning which is
used by scientists all the time in their quest for truth
The Likely and the Unlikely
Arguments for a Designer frequently revolve
around probability. Meaningful complexity is
unlikely to result from random events. Organisms
are meaningfully complex. Some claim that
natural selection overcomes much of this problem
as, while change may be random, selection is not
Science is about predicting what
is likely and what is unlikely.
Everyone is in agreement that the
events leading to production of
living organisms are unlikely
@ Dr. Heinz Lycklama
In a Long Time and Big Universe
It has been argued that given massive lengths of time and a
universe to work in, the unlikely becomes likely:
“Given infinite time, or infinite opportunities, anything is possible.
The large numbers proverbially furnished by astronomy, and the
large time spans characteristic of geology, combine to turn topsy-
turvy our everyday estimates of what is expected and what is
miraculous.” Richard Dawkins (1989) The Blind Watchmaker: Why
the evidence of evolution reveals a universe without design. W. W.
Norton and Co. New York. p139.
Dawkins says that while life looks designed, the designer was
not God, but massive chance coupled with natural selection.
Nature was the designer
In The Panda’s Thumb, Stephen J. Gould argues that life
does not look designed
Little or Big Changes?
Not all changes improve fitness, they may:
Improve the fitness of an organism (very unlikely)
Be neutral, having no effect on fitness
Be detrimental, decreasing an organisms fitness (most likely)
The bigger the change the more likely it is to be
significantly detrimental
Darwin argued that evolution is the accumulation of
many small changes that improve fitness, big changes
are unlikely to result in improved fitness.
“Many large groups of facts are intelligible only on the
principle that species have been evolved by very small
steps.”
The Origin of Species Chapter VII under “Reasons for disbelieving in
great and abrupt modifications”
More Examples
Necessity/law/order
Snowflake
Crystal
Design – irreducible/specified complexity
Animal cell
Molecular motors
Human eye
Bombardier beetle
@ Dr. Heinz Lycklama
Molecular Machines
Behe showed that the
cell, Darwin’s Black
Box, is filled with
irreducibly complex
molecular machines
that could not be built
by natural selection
David Hume criticized
Paley’s watchmaker
argument because it
was not an exact
enough analogy
@ Dr. Heinz Lycklama
Molecular Machines (cont’d)
Over 100 molecular motors are now known to exist inside the
cell with very specific analogies to human designed motors.
@ Dr. Heinz Lycklama
Behe’s Insight
Michael Behe contends that when we look at
the protein machines that run cells, there is a
point at which no parts can be removed and
still have a functioning machine. He called
these machines “irreducibly complex” (IC)
We encounter irreducibly complex devices in
everyday life. A simple mouse trap is an
example of an irreducibly complex device:
Board
Trigger
Staple Cheese
Bait holder
Hammer
Spring
Evolution of Complex Organs
The Origin of Species
Chapter VI "Difficulties
of the Theory"
Organs of Extreme Perfection
and Complication
“To suppose that the eye with all its inimitable
contrivances for adjusting the focus to different
distances, for admitting different amounts of light, and
for the correcting of spherical and chromatic aberration,
could have been formed by natural selection, seems, I
freely confess, absurd in the highest degree.”
@ Dr. Heinz Lycklama
Evolution of the Eye
To go from nothing to an eye would be a
very big jump
Darwin proposed a series of what appeared
to be relatively small steps (they are still
gigantic leaps) that might be able to produce
an eye
@ Dr. Heinz Lycklama
The Bombardier Beetle
An ordinary looking beetle
with an extraordinary
defense mechanism
Could this system evolve one step at a time? All of it is programmed in the
beetle’s DNA. Unless all the parts are present, the whole system is useless.
Even if all the parts were present, if any one of them did not work right, the
beetle’s ancestors might have exploded!
@ Dr. Heinz Lycklama
Intelligent Design (ID)
Uses an “explanatory filter”
Necessity – did it have to happen?
Chance – did it happen by accident?
Design – did an intelligent agent cause it to
happen?
ID theory focuses on what is designed
without answering the questions of who,
when, why and how
@ Dr. Heinz Lycklama
Some ID Observations
ID confronts naturalistic philosophical
underpinnings of evolutionary thinking
ID identifies presuppositions of naturalism
ID is supported by science
ID Does not assume young universe
ID is not Creationism
ID does not mention the Fall
@ Dr. Heinz Lycklama
Issues with Intelligent Design
ID does not attempt to explain all designs
Only certain features are designed
Does not rule out evolutionary processes
ID does not oppose an old age for the earth
ID does not acknowledge God as redeemer
ID distances itself from the problem of evil
ID movement does not identify Designer/Creator
ID divorces the Creator from creation
@ Dr. Heinz Lycklama
Closing Thoughts on ID
Alternative theory to Darwinian Evolution?
Alternative to Creationism?
Should it be taught in public schools?
Critical thinking is needed
Presuppositions must be stated
Church-state issue?
Academic freedom is at stake
@ Dr. Heinz Lycklama
The Latest From Kansas
The Kansas standards say there is a lack
of evidence or natural explanation for the
genetic code, charge that fossil records
are inconsistent with evolutionary theory,
and say certain evolutionary explanations
"often reflect ... inferences from indirect
or circumstantial evidence."
Reuters News Story, August 2, 2006
@ Dr. Heinz Lycklama
@ Dr. Heinz Lycklama
Thank you
for your
attention!
Dr. Heinz Lycklama
heinz@osta.com
www.osta.com
@ Dr. Heinz Lycklama
Creation Organizations
ICR – Institute for Creation Research
www.icr.org
Books by Henry Morris (founder), e.g.
The Genesis Flood
The Genesis Record
The Modern Creation Trilogy
Acts and Facts articles on Creation
Answers in Genesis
www.answersingenesis.org
Founded by Ken Ham
Books, seminars, articles on Creation
@ Dr. Heinz Lycklama
Creation Organizations - 2
Creation Evidence Museum
www.creationevidence.org
Dinosaurs and human tracks
Creation Moments
www.creationmoments.com
Radio spots
Creation Research Society
www.creationresearch.org
Publication of peer-reviewed creation articles
@ Dr. Heinz Lycklama
Creation Organizations - 3
Center For Scientific Creation
www.creationscience.com
“In The Beginning” Book by Walt Brown, Ph.D.
Creation Science Evangelism
www.drdino.com
Videos, seminars
Discovery Institute
www.discovery.org
Intelligent Design “Think Tank”
@ Dr. Heinz Lycklama
Important Books
The Genesis Record, Dr. Henry Morris
The Genesis Flood, Dr. John Whitcomb & Dr. Henry
Morris
The Collapse of Evolution, Scott Huse
The Lie: Evolution, Ken Ham
Refuting Evolution, Dr. Jonathon Sarfati
Evolution: The Fossils Still Say No!, Dr. Duane Gish
Scientific Creationism, Dr. Henry Morris
Starlight and Time, Dr. Russell Humphreys
Dinosaurs by Design, Dr. Duane Gish
@ Dr. Heinz Lycklama
Important Books - 2
The Young Earth, Dr. John Morris
Science and the Bible, Dr. Henry Morris
Tornado in a Junkyard, James Perloff
In The Beginning, Dr. Walt Brown
Evolution: A Theory in Crisis, Michael Denton
Darwin on Trial, Dr. Phillip Johnson
Darwin’s Black Box, Dr. Michael Behe
Design Inference, Dr. William Dembski
@ Dr. Heinz Lycklama
Backup Slides
@ Dr. Heinz Lycklama
Bacterial Motors
Certain bacteria swim by means of rotary flagella. These are
driven by reversible electric motors!
@ Dr. Heinz Lycklama
Bacterial Motors - 2
@ Dr. Heinz Lycklama
IC Protein Machines
Cells are full of irreducibly complex (IC) devices -
little protein machines that work only if all the parts
(proteins) are present and arranged correctly
Natural selection does not provide a plausible
mechanism to get from nothing to the collection of
parts necessary to run a number of irreducibly
complex protein machines vital to living cells
Evolution of these protein machines must occur in
single big steps, not gradually, as to be selected a
protein must be functional in some way. Each
protein machine is fairly complex, thus evolution in
a single step seems unlikely
Cilia and Flagella
Cilia and Flagella are examples of irreducibly
complex protein machines
Both cilia and flagella are found in the simplest
eukaryotic organisms, single celled protists, as
well as much more complex animals. Some
members of the plant kingdom also have flagella
As complicated structures are thought to have
evolved only once, evolutionary theory suggests
flagella evolved in a very ancient common
ancestor of modern plant and animal cells
@ Dr. Heinz Lycklama
Components of Flagella and Cilia
Flagella and cilia are made of a number of different
protein components:
Three types of microtubuals - singlet, doublet, and
triplet - composed of a and b tubulin
Nexin to separate the tubuals
Protein spokes connecting tubuals to maintain a
constant diameter
Spoke heads
Dynein arms that interact with adjacent microtubuals
A basal plate
Each of these components must be present if the
flagella or cilia is to work.
@ Dr. Heinz Lycklama
Flagella Parts
Radial spokes Dynein arms
Microtubual
doublet Plasma
membrane
Central
microtubuals
@ Dr. Heinz Lycklama
Are Little Jumps Possible?
Cilia or flagella, missing any single part will not bend, they
are thus irreducibly complex
Parts having functions enhancing fitness independent of a role
in locomotion, after developing some functionality, could
evolve via random change and natural selection
Microtubuals are an important part of the cytoskeleton of all
eukaryotic cells, thus they could evolve independently
No other protein components of cilia and flagella have known
functions independent of their role in movement
Thus, all proteins, other than tubulin in microtubuals, would
have to spontaneously come into existence simultaneously if
they were to increase fitness and be selected.
That seems like a big jump!
@ Dr. Heinz Lycklama
There Is More
Cilia and flagella represent the tip of the iceberg
of our current understanding of the little machines
that make up cells. Our current understanding of
how cells function is still fragmentary, but even
in this limited set of knowledge, numerous
examples of irreducible complexity exist
Irreducible complexity at the biochemical level
represents a powerful challenge to the theory that
natural selection can account for the origin of
modern living organisms
@ Dr. Heinz Lycklama