No. 207 “To the law and to the testimony: if they speak not according to this word, it is because there is no light in them” (Isaiah 8:20). March 2006 Insufficient Design by Henry M. Morris* The modern Intelligent Design movement their dates for Earth’s age are incon- (ID) has been making substantial pro- sistent with scripture (too old).3 gress in recent years, at least in terms of The editor even entitled his diatribe “Twi- public interest. As one evolutionist re- light for the Enlightenment?” cently warned his colleagues: Similar alarmist articles have been The success of the ID movement to published in numerous other science jour- date is terrifying. In at least 40 states, nals and also in many popular magazines ID is being considered as an addi- (such as Newsweek) and local papers. Our tion to the required science curricu- own San Diego Union Tribune in a lum in public schools.1 lengthy lead editorial for November 21, The “terrified” author of this observation 2005, called Intelligent Design “Voodoo is Professor of Anthropology at Pennsyl- Science” in the editorial title. The lan- vania State University. He says he is be- guage seems inflammatory just about ing stalked by ID advocates! everywhere. Now I know that I and my colleagues One writer becomes unreasonably are being stalked with careful and virulent in his latest editorial. deadly deliberation. I fear my days The “Intelligent Design” movement are numbered unless I act soon and is the most pernicious pseudoscience effectively. If you are reading this, of our time. It seeks to undermine the chances are that you are in the the teaching of evolution, at a mini- same position.2 mum, but at its root is a broad attack 4 The editor of the prestigious magazine on the nature of science itself. Science, in his lead editorial in a recent He then calls ID “an ancient and long- issue, expressed his alarm thus: discredited faith-based idea with zero 5 Alternatives to the teaching of bio- scientific evidence.” logical evolution are now being de- Is ID Really Intelligent? bated in no fewer than 40 states. The reason for calling attention to this Worse, evolution is not the only sci- almost universally negative reaction to ence under such challenge. In sev- the ID movement among leaders in sci- eral school districts, geology mate- ence, education, law, journalism, and rials are being rewritten because other fields is to note the unrealistic hope *Dr. Henry M. Morris is Founder and President Emeritus of ICR. a that ID leaders have about their move- function, such a system is unreliable, ment. Christians have been pointing out and therefore, if it is designed, the for a very long time that the ubiquitous designer is inept.7 evidences for design in nature constitute This is a clear example of specious rea- strong evidences for God and creation. soning, but Perakh belabors it at some But atheists and other unbelievers have length. It does lead, however, to an im- long hailed Darwinism as their deliver- portant conclusion. That is, mere com- ance from this constraint. plexity is not proof of design. Now the ID people think that by dis- For example, a perfectly cubical ob- tancing their movement from creationism ject found in a pile of rocks, say, would and the Biblical God as the obvious De- certainly have been designed for some signer, they can make ID acceptable. kind of purpose—say, as a toy block for They are learning, however, that opposi- a child to play with or as one of a pair of tion to ID is even stronger among scien- dice for a gambler to throw. An irregular tists, if anything, than the opposition to rock in that same pile, on the other hand, straightforward creationism. would be much more complex and there- Many evolutionists now regard ID as fore more difficult to specify than the a hypocritical form of creationism and cube but it clearly would have been thus really a religion rather than science. formed randomly by a hodgepodge of Another skeptic has pointed out what forces over a long period of time. he thinks is a very different reason for In other words, complexity in itself rejecting the main ID contention. is not evidence of design. But if it is or- According to Behe and Dembski, the ganized and purposive complexity, then more complex a system, the more it would surely seem to have been de- likely it was designed—this is the signed. Therefore, instead of wasting essence of Point A in Behe’s concept. time and talent on evolutionary specu- Point B (irreducibility) in Behe’s lation as to how natural selection might concept asserts that an IC system have generated a particular animal, say, loses its function if even a single part creationists believe that the scientist is missing.6 would more profitably have tried to de- That is, a system is irreducibly complex termine why the Designer created such (IC) if it could no longer function if even an animal. one part is missing. That, according to In any case, evolutionists almost uni- these two leaders of the ID movement versally conclude that: “As currently pro- (Michael Behe and William Dembski) moted, ID theory is neither new nor good 8 means it must have been intelligently de- science.” signed. Creation and/or Design But this particular writer opines that The most serious deficiency in the ID this would be proof that it was not de- movement, however, is its neglect of the signed by any kind of intelligence! Thus, most important of the alleged evidences it must have been assembled somehow for evolution—that is, the problem of the by impersonal time and chance. fossils. These are the remains of billions The simple fact is, though, that if an and billions of once-living plants and IC system has been designed, it is a animals now preserved in the sedimen- case of bad design. If the loss of a tary crust of the earth. These all give single part destroys the system’s abundant evidence of suffering and death b during all the supposed geological ages But remember that government schools which they are supposed to depict. are unscriptural in the first place. The Did the Designer do that? If so, just home is, Biblically speaking, ultimately how and why? The only adequate answer responsible for the teaching of its youth. is in the Bible, in its record of man’s sin, The original schools and colleges of our the resulting global Curse and eventual country were always either homeschools Deluge. But the very purpose of the ID or sponsored by Christians, with govern- movement is to argue for intelligent de- ment schools “evolving” later. sign without reference to the Bible and If the options of homeschooling or re- the God of the Bible. Without those fac- ligious schooling are not available (as tors, however, it would seem that the only was true for my own six children), then alternative would be to assume the De- the parents should monitor what their signer to be a sadistic producer of global offspring are being taught in the public evil as well as the intelligent producer of schools and colleges and help them get irreducible complexity. it all back in Biblical perspective. We so-called “Young-Earth Creation- Two key Bible texts are appropriate ists” also have always believed and taught in this connection. “Study to shew thy- what seem to us to be irrefutable evidences self approved unto God, . rightly di- of intelligent design in nature, but that is viding the word of truth” (II Timothy not enough. We simply have to take the 2:15). Then, “But sanctify the Lord God Biblical record as God’s Word, in which in your hearts: and be ready always to He has taught the real and total truth about give an answer to every man that asketh origins, as well as about sin and death, then you a reason of the hope that is in you providing also the wonderful solution to with meekness and fear” (I Peter 3:15). all such problems in the glorious Gospel Endnotes of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ. 1. Pat Shipman, “Being Stalked by Whether these facts are considered Intelligent Design,” American Scientist scientific or not, they are historical facts (vol. 93, November/December 2005), which should be considered if Truth is p. 502. the ultimate goal. 2. Ibid., p. 501. We appreciate the tremendous contri- 3. Donald Kennedy, “Twilight for the bution the ID leaders have made to the Enlightenment?” Science (vol. 308, origins question, but we feel we must urge April 8, 2005), p. 165. them to believe the whole counsel of God 4. Kendrick Frazier, “Evolution and the and return to the true Biblical record of ID Wars,” Skeptical Inquirer (vol. 29, November/December 2005), p. 4. recent Special Creation, the Fall and Frazier is Editor of this magazine. Curse, the worldwide Flood, and the 5. Ibid. promised return of God in Christ to con- 6. Mark Perakh, “Does Irreducible summate His purposes in Creation. Complexity Imply Intelligent Design?” Although it is unlikely that full- Skeptical Inquirer (vol. 29, November/ fledged creation will ever be accepted in December, 2005), p. 34. public schools, it can be argued that In- 7. Ibid., p. 35. telligent Design will not be accepted 8. Michael F. Antolin and Joan M. there either. Even if an occasional school Herbers, “Evolution’s Struggle for board decides to insist on it, it would be Existence in America’s Public Schools,” Evolution (vol.