Attorney's 'Guest Editorial' Takes Practical Look at 'Intelligent Design'

(Blogger's note: I enjoyed this piece so much, written by Western New York attorney Jeffrey Allen Spencer and published some years ago in The Buffalo News, that I've taken the liberty of posting it on my blog -- strictly for the enlightenment of those fortunate enough to read it.)


Theory Doesn't Account for Life's Amazing Complexity

By Jeffrey A. Spencer

Like a giant colossus, Charles Darwin and the theory of evolution have for more than a century cast a huge shadow over scientific and intellectual thought, shaping our view of ourselves and our world. The theory has gained such widespread acceptance that almost any criticism is viewed at best as a misguided denial of reality and at worst as a stealth effort to sneak creationism into our public schools.

The "spin" one usually gets in public commentary is that this is a battle between science and religion, the old Scopes monkey trial revisited but dressed in new clothes. The bigger story that never seems to hit the front page is that well credentialed scientists from across the globe have raised serious questions concerning the viability of the theory.

Good science takes a hard look at the facts while keeping an open mind to new or alternative interpretations of those facts. From the beginning, the theory of evolution has always been a controversial interpretation of the facts.

The theory is based on assumed innumerable small changes over long periods of time. However, Darwin himself noted the absence of transitional species in the fossil record and shuddered at the incredible complexity of nature. We now know that even a "simple" cell has the complexity of a modern city, and that each living creature has billions of those interdependent cells, perfectly coordinated to perform thousands of functions. All this complexity is directed by an information system (DNA) that far exceeds the Encyclopedia Britannica in its magnitude.

As any computer geek can tell you, you can't get a more complex information program out of a simple one. Einstein recognized that one of the fundamental laws of the universe is that matter moved over time from order to disorder (Second Law of Thermodynamics). The theory of evolution asks us to believe that all this incredible complexity, organized through an amazingly complex information system, happened by accident over time.

The clear evidence for the adaptability of a species within limits as part of a species' genetic code (i.e., the great variation in dog breeds) demonstrates the marvelous flexibility of these codes. But even determined breeders have never been able to produce anything other than a dog. One wonders how an undirected, "accidental" process could have done better.

Doctrinaire evolutions take issue with the "intelligent design" movement, alleging the theological implications of a "designer," yet are comfortable in continuing to proselytize for their own "faith" that astoundingly complex life on planet Earth somehow arose through a haphazard accidental process.

In spite of reasonable questions about whether the theory still fits the facts, evolution seems to have been elevated to a place of "scientific correctness" to which serious criticism is not permitted. The fear that some critics of evolution may have a religious agenda is surely not sufficient reason to ignore contrary evidence or to close one's mind to alternative interpretations. Good science, good education and intellectual honesty demand more.