Experimental Evidence for Causal Adequacy of Intelligent Design

synthetic-bioIn the previous article on DNA as evidence for Intelligence behind the origin of Life, we showed that Intelligence is the only known cause to produce the effect in question, namely the origin of information in the DNA. But many people claim that this cannot be proved as there is no experimental evidence to show this. However this is not true.

We previously showed in the article Does Synthetic Genetics provide evidence for Darwinian Evolution? That Synthetic genetics, infact, provides experimental evidence for Intelligent Design and not Darwinian evolution. Dr. Stephen C. Meyer provides more examples of this in his book, Signature in the Cell: DNA and the Evidence for Intelligent Design from the simulation experiments of various kinds that scientists have performed for now over fifty years in an attempt to demonstrate the plausibility of some favored origin-of-life scenario. He explains

These experiments inadvertently demonstrated not only the power of mind over matter, but also the necessity of a mind to arrange matter into structures relevant to life.

Discussing about the conclusions that can be drawn from the experiments, he says

If these experiments were fables, they would have a moral: minds can produce biologically relevant structures and forms of information, but without mind or intelligence little, if any, information arises.

He mentions three types of experimental results that confirm this.

  1. Prebiotic Simulation Experiments
  2. Evolutionary Algorithms
  3. Ribozyme Engineering

In Prebiotic  Dr. Meyer, points out

In these and many other ways, investigators must routinely manipulate chemical conditions both before and after performing “simulation” experiments in order to protect them from destructive naturally occurring processes. These manipulations constitute “profoundly informative intervention[s].” Every choice the investigator makes to actualize one condition and exclude another—to remove one by-product and not another—imparts information into the system. Therefore, whatever “success” these experiments have achieved in producing biologically relevant compounds occurs as a direct result of the activity of the experimentalist—a conscious, intelligent, deliberative mind—performing the experiments.

As for Evolutionary Algorithms, he points out

some of these programs succeed by the illicit expedient of providing the computer with an information-rich “target sequence” and then treating relatively greater proximity to future function (i.e., the target sequence), not actual present function, as a selection criterion.

In Ribozyme Engineering, he points out

So what supplies this gap in ribozyme engineering experiments? What causes a molecule possessing merely possible indicators of a future selectable function to be preserved? The investigators themselves—the ribozyme engineers.

He explains

 Each of these manipulations again constitutes an “informative intervention,” since at every crucial stage ribozyme engineers select some options or possible states and exclude others. By using their knowledge of the requirements of polymerase function to guide their search and selection process, ribozyme engineers also impart what Robert Marks calls “active information” with each iteration of replication.

These experiments clearly show, not only the causal adequacy, but also the need for intelligence. Thus we conclude that the origin of life points towards an Intelligent Cause, rather than a material cause.


About Kashif Zuberi

Student of Knowledge

2 comments on “Experimental Evidence for Causal Adequacy of Intelligent Design

  1. Salam Alaykum,

    Would it not be better to make an epistemological critique of the scientific method, and tie it with the Islamic view on causality?

    For example, putting aside evolution, someone may say that every time a fire is lit, it will burn a human being who comes into direct contact with it – and due to this they will deny that Ibrahim (alayhi salaam) was saved from the fire by Divine Command. This matter of the burning property of fire is actually much more testable than the intricacies of evolutionary research, which cannot be carried out by most people.

    But when we consider some of the philosophy behind science, then we see that our experiments with fire or evolution do not give certain evidence… perhaps some line of research along these lines can also be used to supplement the latest observational findings that may clash with evolutionary theories.

    • Walekum salaam

      Well, when the point can be proven by using the scientific method itself, then why waste time in making a critique of the scientific method.

      As for miracles that God did with his prophets, then that is a completely different question. When Quran informs us about the story of the Prophet Abraham and the miracle that God performed through him to provide a clear sign for the people of his time, its clearly not describing a natural phenomenon, which makes it a miracle in the first place.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: