Thursday, August 17, 2006
Jonathan Wells: The Fading Promise of ID
Not much more than a year ago, the Discovery Institute breathlessly announced that, Jonathan Wells had published an article using the theory of intelligent design to formulate a testable hypothesis about centrioles.
Let's leave aside, for now, that it's rare for a real scientist to put out a news release when she or he formulates an hypothesis -- that usually awaits a confirmation -- and look at what they said then:
So, Wells -- described by Discovery as a microbiologist -- has been working night and day this past year in his lab on experiments that would confirm his hypothesis, right?
Wrong.
Paradoxically, Wells has chosen not to provide the scientific confirmation intelligent design so desperately needs to take it from a fringe religious belief to mainstream science. Not to make a major contribution to our scientific understanding of cell structure. Not to unlock the secret to cancer. Not even to make a name for himself as a real scientist.
He's chosen instead to churn out yet another forgettable ID tract titled, The Politically Incorrect Guide to Darwin and Intelligent Design.
The question is why?
Perhaps you'll find the answer to this puzzling question here.
Let's leave aside, for now, that it's rare for a real scientist to put out a news release when she or he formulates an hypothesis -- that usually awaits a confirmation -- and look at what they said then:
Wells' hypothesis--if confirmed by experiments--would explain how centrioles function in normal cell division and malfunction in cancer. The hypothesis could also help to explain why there is a correlation between calcium and Vitamin D deficiency and major types of cancer.So, in one stroke Wells hypothesis might have explained how centriols function, made a major contribution to our understanding of the underlying mechanisms of cancer, and provided the first truly scientific confirmation of intelligent design.
So, Wells -- described by Discovery as a microbiologist -- has been working night and day this past year in his lab on experiments that would confirm his hypothesis, right?
Wrong.
Paradoxically, Wells has chosen not to provide the scientific confirmation intelligent design so desperately needs to take it from a fringe religious belief to mainstream science. Not to make a major contribution to our scientific understanding of cell structure. Not to unlock the secret to cancer. Not even to make a name for himself as a real scientist.
He's chosen instead to churn out yet another forgettable ID tract titled, The Politically Incorrect Guide to Darwin and Intelligent Design.
The question is why?
Perhaps you'll find the answer to this puzzling question here.
