Design inteligente (parte2)

Status fora dos Estados Unidos[editar | editar código-fonte]

Europa[editar | editar código-fonte]

Em junho de 2007, o “Comitê sobre Cultura, Ciência e Educação” do Conselho da Europa emitiu um relatório, "The dangers of creationism in education" (Os perigos do criacionismo na educação), que afirmava que “[O] Criacionismo em qualquer uma de suas formas, tal como o ‘design inteligente’, não é baseado em fatos, não usa de racionalização científica e seus conteúdos são pateticamente inadequados para aulas de ciências”. .212 Ao descrever os perigos atribuídos ao ensino do criacionismo para a educação, o relatório descreveu o design inteligente como “anticiência” que envolve “ostensiva fraude científica” e “dissimulação intelectual” que “macula a natureza, objetividade e limites da ciência” e o liga bem como outras formas de criacionismo ao negacionismo. Em 4 de outubro de 2007, a Assembleia Parlamentar do Conselho da Europa aprovou uma resolução declarando que escolas deveriam “resistir a apresentações de ideias criacionistas em qualquer disciplina que não seja religião”, incluindo o “design inteligente” que é descrito como “a última, e mais refinada versão do criacionismo”, “apresentado de uma forma mais sutil”. A resolução dá ênfase que o objetivo do relatório não é o de questionar ou de combater uma crença, mas o de “alertar contra certas tendências de passar uma crença como ciência”.213
No Reino Unido, a educação pública inclui Educação Religiosa como um assunto compulsório, e muitas “escolas religiosas” ensinam o ethos particular de suas respectivas denominações. Quando foi revelado que um grupo chamado Truth in Science (Verdade na Ciência) havia distribuído DVDs produzidos pela afiliada do Discovery Institute, Illustra Media214 apresentando membros do Discovery Institute defendendo o caso do design inteligente na natureza,215 além da alegação de que os DVDs haviam sido usados por 59 escolas,216 o Department for Education and Skills (DfES) afirmou que “Nem o criacionismo ou o design inteligente são ensinados como assunto nas escolas, e não são especificados no currículo de ciências” (parte do Currículo Nacional que não se aplica a escolas independentes ou a Educação na Escócia).217 218 O DfES subsequentemente afirmou que o “design inteligente não é uma teoria científica reconhecida; logo, não está incluída no currículo de ciências”, mas abriu a possibilidade do DI ser explorado na educação religiosa em relação a diferentes crenças, como parte do sílabo desenvolvido pelos conselhos consultivos locais de educação religiosa.219 Em 2006 a Qualifications and Curriculum Authority (Autoridade de Qualificações e Currículos) produziu uma unidade modelo de Educação Religiosa onde os estudantes podem aprender sobre visões religiosas e não religiosas acerca do criacionismo, do design inteligente e da evolução por meio da seleção natural.220 221
Em 25 de junho de 2007, o Governo do Reino Unido respondeu uma “e-petition” dizendo que o criacionismo e o design inteligente não deveriam ser ensinados como ciência, entretanto se esperaria que professores respondessem as perguntas de seus alunos com o arcabouço padrão das teorias científicas estabelecidas.222 Em 18 de setembro de 2007 foi publicado um detalhado guia de ensino criacionista governamental para escolas na Inglaterra.220 No documento era dito que o “design inteligente reside totalmente fora da ciência”, não possui princípios científicos centrais, ou explicações, e não é aceito pela totalidade da comunidade científica. Embora não deva ser ensinado como ciência, “questões acerca do criacionismo e do design inteligente que são levantadas em aulas de ciência, por exemplo, como consequência da cobertura da mídia, podem apresentar a oportunidade de explicar ou explorar o porquê de ambos não serem considerados teorias científicas, e no contexto certo, o porquê da evolução ser considerada uma teoria científica”. Entretanto, “Professores de matérias como RE, história ou cidadania podem lidar com criacionismo e design inteligente em suas lições”.15
O grupo de lobbying British Centre for Science Education (Centro Britânico para Educação Científica) tem como objetivo “opor-se ao criacionismo dentro do Reino Unido” e já se envolveu em lobbying governamental no Reino Unido em relação a esse assunto.223 Entretanto, na Irlanda do Norte o Partido Unionista Democrático (em inglês Democratic Unionist Party, DUP) alega que o currículo revisado fornece uma oportunidade para o ensino de teorias alternativas, e vem buscando garantias de que estudantes não perderão nota ao responder perguntas científicas com respostas com cunho criacionista/design inteligente.224 Em Lisburn o DUP conseguiu fazer com que o Conselho da Cidade escrevesse para escolas pós-primarias perguntando quais eram seus planos em relação ao desenvolvimento de material de ensino relacionado a “criação, ao design inteligente e outras teorias sobre a origem”.225
Nos Países Baixos, planos desenvolvidos pela Ministra da Educação Maria van der Hoeven de “estimular um debate acadêmico” sobre o assunto em 2005 causaram uma grande reação pública negativa.226 Depois das eleições de 2007 ela foi sucedida por Ronald Plasterk, que foi descrito como um “geneticista molecular, ateísta ferrenho e oponente do design inteligente”.227
Como uma reação a situação nos Países Baixos, na Bélgica, o Presidente do Conselho Educacional Católico Flamengo (VSKO em neerlandês) Mieke Van Hecke declarou que: “Cientistas católicos já aceitam a teoria da evolução a um longo tempo e que o design inteligente e o criacionismo não pertencem a escolas católicas flamengas. Não é a função dos políticos de introduzir novas ideias, essa é a função e o objetivo da ciência”.228

Em outras regiões[editar | editar código-fonte]

O criacionismo possui grande influência política em vários países islâmicos, visões antievolucionárias são consideradas mainstream e apresentam considerável apoio oficial, apoio das elites bem como de teólogos acadêmicos e cientistas.229 Em geral, criacionistas muçulmanos fazem parcerias com o Institute for Creation Research por ideias e materiais que eles posteriormente adaptam para suas próprias posições teológicas. Similarmente, também foi usado material antievolutivo sobre o design inteligente. Muzaffar Iqbal, um notável muçulmano do Canadá, assinou a lista de Dissidentes do Darwinismo do Discovery Institute.230 . Ideias similares ao design inteligente são consideradas opções intelectualmente respeitáveis entre muçulmanos, e na Turquia muitos livros sobre o design inteligente foram traduzidos. Em 2007 em Instambul, encontros públicos promovendo o design inteligente foram patrocinados pelo governo local,229 e David Berlinski, do Discovery Institute, foi um dos palestrantes principais em um encontro em maio de 2007.231
O status do design inteligente na Austrália é bem similar ao do Reino Unido. Quando o ex-Ministro da Educação Federal Brendan Nelson levantou a noção do ensino do design inteligente em aulas de ciências, os protestos da população fizeram com que o ex-ministro rapidamente se retratasse ao afirmar que o correto fórum do design inteligente, se ele fosse ensinado, seria em aulas de religião ou filosofia.232

A Resposta de Michael Behe à reação Institucional[editar | editar código-fonte]

Consciente de que sua obra, a "Caixa Preta de Darwin", produziria um vendaval de contestações e muita polêmica no meio científico, Michael Behe, talvez o principal proponente do Design Inteligente, afirmou em entrevista feita em 2006:
Com certeza, eu previa que meu livro causaria controvérsia. Os darwinistas têm replicado dizendo, principalmente, que explicarão os sistemas moleculares no futuro, talvez dentro de dez ou vinte anos. Para dizer o mínimo, sou bastante cético quanto a essa pretensão.
A primeira reação da maioria dos críticos é dizer: “Isso é apenas criacionismo levemente disfarçado.” E em resenhas escritas por cientistas eles falam frequentemente sobre os primeiros capítulos de Gênesis e do “Julgamento da Criação”, de Arkansas, nenhum dos quais eu menciono no livro. Assim, eles tentam condenar meu trabalho através do processo de associação. Eles também não vêem que há uma distinção entre chegar a uma conclusão simplesmente pela observação do mundo físico, como se espera que um cientista faça, e chegar a uma conclusão baseado na Bíblia ou em convicções religiosas.[14].

Referências

  1. ↑ Ir para:a b Top Questions-1.What is the theory of intelligent design? Discovery Institute. Visitado em 2007-05-13..
  2. Ir para cima↑ Primer: Intelligent Design Theory in a Nutshell (PDF) Intelligent Design and Evolution Awareness Center (2004). Visitado em 2007-05-13.
    • Intelligent Design Intelligent Design network (2007). Visitado em 2007-05-13.
  3. Ir para cima↑ Numbers, Ronald L.. The Creationists, Expanded Edition. [S.l.]: Harvard University Press, 2006. pp 373, 379-380 pp. ISBN 0674023390.
  4. ↑ Ir para:a b Kitzmiller v. Dover Area School District (2005), Context pg. 32 ff, citing Edwards v. Aguillard.
  5. ↑ Ir para:a b "ID is not a new scientific argument, but is rather an old religious argument for the existence of God. He traced this argument back to at least Thomas Aquinas in the 13th century, who framed the argument as a syllogism: Wherever complex design exists, there must have been a designer; nature is complex; therefore nature must have had an intelligent designer." "This argument for the existence of God was advanced early in the 19th century by Reverend Paley" (the teleological argument) "The only apparent difference between the argument made by Paley and the argument for ID, as expressed by defense expert witnesses Behe and Minnich, is that ID's 'official position' does not acknowledge that the designer is God." Kitzmiller v. Dover Area School District (2005), Ruling, p. 24.
  6. ↑ Ir para:a b c Forrest, Barbara (May, 2007). Understanding the Intelligent Design Creationist Movement: Its True Nature and Goals. A Position Paper from the Center for Inquiry, Office of Public Policy Center for Inquiry, Inc.. Visitado em 2007-08-06..
  7. ↑ Ir para:a b "Q. Has the Discovery Institute been a leader in the intelligent design movement? A. Yes, the Discovery Institute's Center for Science and Culture. Q. And are almost all of the individuals who are involved with the intelligent design movement associated with the Discovery Institute? A. All of the leaders are, yes". Barbara Forrest, 2005, testifying in theKitzmiller v. Dover Area School District trial. Kitzmiller v. Dover Area School District Trial transcript: Day 6 (October 5), PM Session, Part 1. The TalkOrigins Archive (2005). Visitado em 2007-07-19.
    • "The Discovery Institute is the ideological and strategic backbone behind the eruption of skirmishes over science in school districts and state capitals across the country". In: Wilgoren, J. "Politicized Scholars Put Evolution on the Defensive" (PDF), The New York Times, 2005-08-21. Página visitada em 2007-07-19.
    • Who is behind the ID movement? Frequently Asked Questions About "Intelligent Design" American Civil Liberties Union (2005-09-16). Visitado em 2007-07-20.
    • Kahn, JP. "The Evolution of George Gilder. The Author And Tech-Sector Guru Has A New Cause To Create Controversy With: Intelligent Design", The Boston Globe, 2005-07-27. Página visitada em 2007-07-19.
    • Who's Who of Intelligent Design Proponents Science & Religion Guide Science & Theology News (November 2005). Visitado em 2007-07-20. (PDF file from Discovery Institute).
    • "The engine behind the ID movement is the Discovery Institute". Attie, Alan D.; Elliot Sober, Ronald L. Numbers, Richard M. Amasino, Beth Cox4, Terese Berceau, Thomas Powell and Michael M. Cox (2006). Defending science education against intelligent design: a call to action Journal of Clinical Investigation 116:1134–1138. doi:10.1172/JCI28449 A publication of the American Society for Clinical Investigation.. Visitado em 2007-07-20.
  8. ↑ Ir para:a b Science and Policy: Intelligent Design and Peer Review American Association for the Advancement of Science (2007). Visitado em 2007-07-19.
  9. ↑ Ir para:a b c "the writings of leading ID proponents reveal that the designer postulated by their argument is the God of Christianity". Kitzmiller v. Dover Area School District (2005), Ruling p. 26. A selection of writings and quotes of intelligent design supporters demonstrating this identification of the Christian God with the intelligent designer are found in the pdf Horse's Mouth by Brian Poindexter, dated 2003.
  10. Ir para cima↑ Principais questões sobre o Design Inteligente (em inglês)
  11. Ir para cima↑ Top Questions about intelligent design Discovery Institute. Visitado em 2007-05-13.
  12. Ir para cima↑ Stephen C. Meyer and Paul A. Nelson, May 1, 1996, CSC – Getting Rid of the Unfair Rules, A book review, Origins & Design, Retrieved 2007-05-20,
    • Phillip E. Johnson, August 31, 1996, Starting a Conversation about Evolution, Access Research Network Phillip Johnson Files, Retrieved 2007-05-20,
    • Stephen C. Meyer, December 1, 2002, Ignatius Press. The Scientific Status of Intelligent Design: The Methodological Equivalence of Naturalistic and Non-Naturalistic Origins Theories,
    • Kitzmiller v. Dover Area School District (2005), Whether ID Is Science,
    • Kitzmiller v. Dover Area School District (2005), Lead defense expert Professor Behe admitted that his broadened definition of science, which encompasses ID, would also include astrology.
    • See also Evolution of Kansas science standards continues as Darwin's theories regain prominence International Herald Tribune, February 13, 2007, Retrieved 2007-05-20.
  13. Ir para cima↑ See: 1) List of scientific societies rejecting intelligent design 2) Kitzmiller v. Dover page 83. 3) The Discovery Institute's A Scientific Dissent From Darwinism petition begun in 2001 has been signed by "over 700 scientists" as of August 20, 2006. A four day A Scientific Support for Darwinism petition gained 7733 signatories from scientists opposing ID. The AAAS, the largest association of scientists in the U.S., has 120,000 members, and firmly rejects ID. More than 70,000 Australian scientists and educators condemn teaching of intelligent design in school science classesList of statements from scientific professional organizations on the status intelligent design and other forms of creationism. According to The New York Times "There is no credible scientific challenge to the theory of evolution as an explanation for the complexity and diversity of life on earth". Dean, Cordelia. "Scientists Feel Miscast in Film on Life's Origin", The New York Times, September 27, 2007. Página visitada em 2007-09-28.
  14. ↑ Ir para:a b Teachernet, Document bank Creationism teaching guidance UK Department for Children, Schools and Families (September 18, 2007). Visitado em 2007-10-01. "The intelligent design movement claims there are aspects of the natural world that are so intricate and fit for purpose that they cannot have evolved but must have been created by an 'intelligent designer'. Furthermore they assert that this claim is scientifically testable and should therefore be taught in science lessons. Intelligent design lies wholly outside of science. Sometimes examples are quoted that are said to require an 'intelligent designer'. However, many of these have subsequently been shown to have a scientific explanation, for example, the immune system and blood clotting mechanisms.
    Attempts to establish an idea of the 'specified complexity' needed for intelligent design are surrounded by complex mathematics. Despite this, the idea seems to be essentially a modern version of the old idea of the "God-of-the-gaps". Lack of a satisfactory scientific explanation of some phenomena (a 'gap' in scientific knowledge) is claimed to be evidence of an intelligent designer."
  15. Ir para cima↑ Nature Methods Editorial. (2007). "An intelligently designed response". Nat. Methods 4(12): 983. DOI:10.1038/nmeth1207-983.
  16. Ir para cima↑ Mark Greener. (2007). "Taking on creationism. Which arguments and evidence counter pseudoscience?". EMBO Reports 8 (12): 1107–1109. DOI:10.1038/sj.embor.7401131.
  17. Ir para cima↑ National Academy of Sciences, 1999 Science and Creationism: A View from the National Academy of Sciences, Second Edition
  18. Ir para cima↑ National Science Teachers Association, a professional association of 55,000 science teachers and administrators in a 2005 press release: "We stand with the nation's leading scientific organizations and scientists, including Dr. John Marburger, the president's top science advisor, in stating that intelligent design is not science. ...It is simply not fair to present pseudoscience to students in the science classroom". National Science Teachers Association Disappointed About Intelligent Design Comments Made by President BushNational Science Teachers Association Press Release August 3, 2005.
    • "for most members of the mainstream scientific community, ID is not a scientific theory, but a creationist pseudoscience". Trojan Horse or Legitimate Science: Deconstructing the Debate over Intelligent Design David Mu. Harvard Science Review, Volume 19, Issue 1, Fall 2005.
    • "Creationists are repackaging their message as the pseudoscience of intelligent design theory". Professional Ethics Report American Association for the Advancement of Science, 2001.
  19. Ir para cima↑ SBG - SOCIEDADE BRASILEIRA DE GENÉTICA sbg.org.br (2012 [last update]). Visitado em 8 de julho de 2012.
  20. ↑ Ir para:a b c Kitzmiller v. Dover Area School District (2005), pp. 31 – 33.
  21. ↑ Ir para:a b Media Backgrounder: Intelligent Design Article Sparks Controversy Discovery Institute. September 7, 2004.
    • Berkeley's Radical James M. Kushiner. Touchstone Magazine, June 2002.
    • Politicized Scholars Put Evolution on the Defensive Jodi Wilgoren. The New York Times, August 21 2005.
    • Downey, Roger. "Discovery's Creation", Seattle Weekly, February 1, 2006. Página visitada em 2007-07-27.
  22. Ir para cima↑ Kitzmiller v. Dover Area School District (2005), Conclusion of Ruling.
  23. Ir para cima↑ Edwards v. Aguillard
  24. Ir para cima↑ Eugenie C. Scott; Gordon E. Uno (1989). NCSE Resource Introduction to NCSE Bookwatch Reviews for Of Pandas and People'. Visitado em 2007-09-24.
  25. Ir para cima↑ "Although science has made great progress by limiting itself to explaining only through natural causes, Johnson would have us allow the occasional supernatural intervention for those phenomena that cause problems for his particular theology". Darwin On Trial: A Review by Eugenie C. Scott. NCSE
  26. Ir para cima↑ Phillip E. Johnson (1999). The Wedge: Phillip Johnson Touchstone: A Journal of Mere Christianity. Visitado em 2007-09-24.
  27. ↑ Ir para:a b Nick Matzke (2004). NCSE Resource Introduction: Of Pandas and People, the foundational work of the 'Intelligent Design' movement NCSE. Visitado em 2007-09-24.
  28. Ir para cima↑ "ID fails on three different levels, any one of which is sufficient to preclude a determination that ID is science. They are: (1) ID violates the centuries-old ground rules of science by invoking and permitting supernatural causation; (2) the argument of irreducible complexity, central to ID, employs the same flawed and illogical contrived dualism that doomed creation science in the 1980s; and (3) ID's negative attacks on evolution have been refuted by the scientific community" Kitzmiller v. Dover Area School District (2005),Ruling, page 64 ff
    • "Broom shows conclusively that intelligent design's opposition to Darwinism rests primarily on scientific grounds". William Dembski, in the forward of How Blind is the Watchmaker? Nature's Design and the Limits of Naturalistic Science. Neil Broom. 2001
  29. Ir para cima↑ "If I ever became the president of a university (per impossibile), I would dissolve the biology department and divide the faculty with tenure that I couldn't get rid of into two new departments: those who know engineering and how it applies to biological systems would be assigned to the new "Department of Biological Engineering"; the rest, and that includes the evolutionists, would be consigned to the new "Department of Nature Appreciation" (didn't Darwin think of himself as a naturalist?)". "Truly Programmable Matter", William Dembski, 10 January 2007 published at Uncommon Descent. Downloaded 24 May 2007.
    •"Demonstrative charts introduced through Dr. Forrest show parallel arguments relating to the rejection of naturalism, evolution's threat to culture and society, 'abrupt appearance' implying divine creation, the exploitation of the same alleged gaps in the fossil record, the alleged inability of science to explain complex biological information like DNA, as well as the theme that proponents of each version of creationism merely aim to teach a scientific alternative to evolution to show its 'strengths and weaknesses,' and to alert students to a supposed 'controversy' in the scientific community". Kitzmiller v. Dover Area School District, Decision, p. 34 (emphasis added)
    •"Additionally, [leading intelligent design advocate] Dembski agrees that science is ruled by methodological naturalism and argues that this rule must be overturned if ID is to prosper". Kitzmiller v. Dover Area School District, Decision, p. 30.
    •"Intelligent Design [...] supposes that the origins of living things require supernatural interventions to create the intricate, design-like, living forms that we see all around us"."Natural selection vs. intelligent design" From: USA Today (Magazine) January 1, 2004 Author: Ruse, Michael.
  30. Ir para cima↑ Dembski. The Design Revolution. pg. 27 2004
  31. ↑ Ir para:a b Wedge Document Discovery Institute, 1999.
    •"[M]embers of the national ID movement insist that their attacks on evolution aren't religiously motivated, but, rather, scientific in nature. [...] Yet the express strategic objectives of the Discovery Institute; the writings, careers, and affiliations of ID's leading proponents; and the movement's funding sources all betray a clear moral and religious agenda". Inferior Design Chris Mooney. The American Prospect, August 10, 2005.
  32. Ir para cima↑ "ID's rejection of naturalism in any form logically entails its appeal to the only alternative, supernaturalism, as a putatively scientific explanation for natural phenomena. This makes ID a religious belief". Expert Witness Report Barbara Forrest Kitzmiller v. Dover Area School District, April, 2005.
  33. Ir para cima↑ "...the ID movement has not proposed a scientific means of testing its claims..." AAAS Board Resolution on Intelligent Design Theory American Association for the Advancement of Science, 2002.
  34. Ir para cima↑ Kitzmiller v. Dover Area School District (2005), p. 70.
  35. ↑ Ir para:a b c Kitzmiller v. Dover Area School District (2005) 4: whether ID is science
  36. Ir para cima↑ Plato's Timaeus The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy The Metaphysics Research Lab, Stanford University (October 25, 2005). Visitado em 2007-07-22.
  37. Ir para cima↑ Plato. Timaeus Internet Classics Archive classics.mit.edu. Visitado em 2007-07-22.
  38. Ir para cima↑ Aristotle, Metaphysics Bk. 12
  39. Ir para cima↑ Cicero, De Natura Deorum, Book I, 36–37, Latin Library.
  40. Ir para cima↑ Thomas Aquinas, Summa Theologiae. "Thomas Aquinas' 'Five Ways' (archive link)" infaithnet.org.uk.
  41. Ir para cima↑ William Paley, Natural Theology: or, Evidences of the Existence and Attributes of the Deity, 1809, London, Twelfth Edition.
  42. Ir para cima↑ See, e.g., the publisher's editorial description of the 2006 paperback printing of William Paley (1803) Natural Theology" : "William Paley's classic brings depth to the history of intelligent design arguments. The contrivance of the eye, the ear, and numerous other anatomical features throughout the natural world are presented as arguments for God's presence and concern. While there are distinctive differences between Paley's argument and those used today by intelligent design theorists and creationists, it remains a fascinating glimpse of the nineteenth-century's debate over the roles of religion and science".
  43. Ir para cima↑ David C. Steinmetz (2005) "The Debate on Intelligent Design" in The Christian Century, (December, 27, 2005, pp. 27–31.)[1]
  44. Ir para cima↑ Leading intelligent design proponent William Dembski (2001) argues the opposing view inIS INTELLIGENT DESIGN A FORM OF NATURAL THEOLOGY?
  45. Ir para cima↑ Dr Barbara Forrest, Know Your Creationists: Know Your Allies
  46. ↑ Ir para:a b Stephen C. Meyer (March 1986). We Are Not Alone Eternity Access Research Network. Visitado em 2007-10-10.
  47. Ir para cima↑ Charles B. Thaxton, Ph.D. (November 13–16, 1986). DNA, Design and the Origin of Life Christian Leadership Ministries. Visitado em 2007-10-10.
  48. ↑ Ir para:a b Charles B. Thaxton (June 23–26, 1988, revised July 1988 and May 1991). In Pursuit of Intelligent Causes: Some Historical Background. Visitado em 2007-10-06.
  49. ↑ Ir para:a b William Safire. The New York Times. August 21, 2005.On Language: Neo-Creo
  50. ↑ Ir para:a b c Dembski: "Intelligent design is just the Logos theology of John's Gospel restated in the idiom of information theory," Touchstone Magazine. Volume 12, Issue4: July/August, 1999
  51. ↑ Ir para:a b Phillip Johnson: "Our strategy has been to change the subject a bit so that we can get the issue of Intelligent Design, which really means the reality of God, before the academic world and into the schools." Johnson 2004. Christianity.ca. Let's Be Intelligent About Darwin. "This isn't really, and never has been a debate about science. It's about religion and philosophy." Johnson 1996. World Magazine. Witnesses For The Prosecution. "So the question is: "How to win?" That's when I began to develop what you now see full-fledged in the "wedge" strategy: "Stick with the most important thing"—the mechanism and the building up of information. Get the Bible and the Book of Genesis out of the debate because you do not want to raise the so-called Bible-science dichotomy. Phrase the argument in such a way that you can get it heard in the secular academy and in a way that tends to unify the religious dissenters. That means concentrating on, "Do you need a Creator to do the creating, or can nature do it on its own?" and refusing to get sidetracked onto other issues, which people are always trying to do." Johnson 2000. Touchstone magazine. Berkeley's Radical An Interview with Phillip E. Johnson at the Internet Archive
  52. Ir para cima↑ Stephen C. Meyer: "I think the designer is God..." (Darwin, the marketing of Intelligent Design . Nightline ABC News, with Ted Koppel, August 10, 2005); Nancy Pearcey: "By contrast, design theory demonstrates that Christians can sit in the supernaturalist’s “chair” even in their professional lives, seeing the cosmos through the lens of a comprehensive biblical worldview. Intelligent Design steps boldly into the scientific arena to build a case based on empirical data. It takes Christianity out of the ineffectual realm of value and stakes out a cognitive claim in the realm of objective truth. It restores Christianity to its status as genuine knowledge, equipping us to defend it in the public arena". (Total Truth, Crossway Books, June 29, 2004, ISBN 1581344589, pp. 204-205)
  53. Ir para cima↑ Dove, Patrick Edward, The theory of human progression, and natural probability of a reign of justice. London, Johnstone & Hunter, 1850. LC 08031381 "Intelligence-Intelligent Design".
  54. Ir para cima↑ Letter 3154—Darwin, C. R. to Herschel, J. F. W., 23 May 1861, Charles Darwin, Darwin Correspondence Project, Letter 3154, May 23, 1861.
  55. Ir para cima↑ "The British Association", The Times, September 20, 1873, pp. pg. 10; col A..
  56. Ir para cima↑ "Teleological Argument for the Existence of God", William P. Alston, Encyclopedia of Philosophy, Macmillan Publishing Company, Inc. & The Free Press, New York City, New York; Collier Macmillan Publishers, London, Paul Edwards, editor, 1967, ISBN 0028949900
  57. Ir para cima↑ James E. Horigan, Chance or Design?'.' Philosophical Library, 1979.
  58. Ir para cima↑ 'Evolution according to Hoyle: Survivors of disaster in an earlier world', By Nicholas Timmins, The Times, Wednesday, January 13, 1982; pg. 22; Issue 61130; col F. Hoyle stated in a 1982 speech: "...one arrives at the conclusion that biomaterials with their amazing measure or order must be the outcome of intelligent design". [2]
  59. Ir para cima↑ Jonathan Witt (December 20, 2005). Evolution News & Views: Dover Judge Regurgitates Mythological History of Intelligent Design Discovery Institute. Visitado em 2007-10-05.
  60. Ir para cima↑ Nick Matzke (2006). NCSE Resource -- 9.0. Matzke (2006): The Story of the Pandas Drafts National Center for Science Education. Visitado em 2007-11-14.
    *Nick Matzke (2006). Missing Link discovered! National Center for Science Education. Visitado em 2007-11-14.
  61. Ir para cima↑ DarkSyde (March 11, 2006). Daily Kos: Know Your Creationists: Know Your Alliesinterview with Barbara Forrest. Visitado em 2007-10-05.
  62. Ir para cima↑ Richard P. Aulie (1998). A Reader's Guide to Of Pandas and People National Association of Biology Teachers. Visitado em 2007-10-05.
  63. Ir para cima↑ Nick Matzke; Jon Buell (October 13, 2005). I guess ID really was "Creationism's Trojan Horse" after all The Panda's Thumb. Visitado em 2007-10-05., links to Wayback Machine for pdf.
  64. Ir para cima↑ Behe, Michael (1997): Molecular Machines: Experimental Support for the Design Inference [3]
  65. Ir para cima↑ Irreducible complexity of these examples is disputed; see Kitzmiller, pp. 76–78, and Ken Miller Webcast
  66. Ir para cima↑ The Collapse of "Irreducible Complexity" Kenneth R. Miller Brown University [4]
  67. Ir para cima↑ John H. McDonald's "reducibly complex mousetrap"
  68. Ir para cima↑ David Ussery, "A Biochemist's Response to 'The Biochemical Challenge to Evolution'"
  69. Ir para cima↑ For example, Bridgham et al. showed that gradual evolutionary mechanisms can produce complex protein-protein interaction systems from simpler precursors. Bridgham et al.. (2006). "Evolution of Hormone-Receptor Complexity by Molecular Exploitation". Science312 (5770): 97–101. DOI:10.1126/science.1123348.
  70. Ir para cima↑ Orr, H. Allen. "Devolution", The New Yorker, May 30, 2005. This article draws from the following exchange of letters in which Behe admits to sloppy prose and non-logical proof:Behe, M.; Dembski, Wells, Nelson, Berlinski (March 26, 2003). Has Darwin met his match? Letters—An exchange over ID (HTML) Discovery Institute. Visitado em 2006-11-30.
  71. Ir para cima↑ Kitzmiller v. Dover Area School District, 04 cv 2688 (December 20, 2005)., p. 64.
  72. Ir para cima↑ Dembski. Intelligent Design, p. 47
  73. Ir para cima↑ Photograph of William Dembski, by Wesley R. Elsberry, taken at lecture given at University of California at Berkeley, 2006/03/17.
  74. Ir para cima↑ Branden Fitelson, Christopher Stephens, Elliott Sober. Cambridge University Press. 1998How Not to Detect Design: A review of William A. Dembski's The Design Inference—Eliminating Chance Through Small Probabilities
  75. Ir para cima↑ Some of Dembski's responses to assertions of specified complexity being a tautology can be found at [5]
  76. Ir para cima↑ Richard Wein (2002): "Not a Free Lunch But a Box of Chocolates: A critique of William Dembski's book No Free Lunch" [6]
  77. Ir para cima↑ Rich Baldwin, (2005). Information Theory and Creationism
  78. Ir para cima↑ Mark Perakh, (2005). Dembski "displaces Darwinism" mathematically -- or does he?
  79. Ir para cima↑ Jason Rosenhouse, (2001). How Anti-Evolutionists Abuse Mathematics The Mathematical Intelligencer, Vol. 23, No. 4, Fall 2001, pp. 3-8.
  80. Ir para cima↑ John S. Wilkins and Wesley R. Elsberry. Biology and Philosophy, 16: 711–724. 2001.The Advantages of Theft over Toil: The Design Inference and Arguing from Ignorance
  81. Ir para cima↑ Richard Dawkins. The God Delusion. [S.l.: s.n.], 2006. ISBN 0-618-68000-4.
  82. Ir para cima↑ [7] New Scientist, 28 Julho de 2007
  83. Ir para cima↑ http://www.geneticprogramming.us/Fitness.html
  84. Ir para cima↑ with Teleology: The Genetic Programming Heuristic Approach to Modeling
  85. Ir para cima↑ Guillermo Gonzalez. The Privileged Planet: How Our Place in the Cosmos is Designed for Discovery. [S.l.: s.n.], 2004. ISBN 0-89526-065-4.
  86. Ir para cima↑ The Panda's Thumb. review of The Privileged Planet
  87. Ir para cima↑ Is The Universe Fine-Tuned For Us? Victor J. Stenger. University of Colorado. (PDF file)
  88. Ir para cima↑ The Anthropic Principle Victor J. Stenger. University of Colorado. (PDF file)
  89. Ir para cima↑ Our place in the Multiverse Joseph Silk. Nature, Volume 443 Number 7108, September 14, 2006.
  90. Ir para cima↑ See, e.g., Gerald Feinberg and Robert Shapiro, "A Puddlian Fable" in Huchingson,Religion and the Natural Sciences (1993), pp. 220–221
  91. Ir para cima↑ Evidence For Design In The Universe por Hugh Ross, Ph.D. in Astronomy - ver comentários ao final da tabela.
  92. Ir para cima↑ Comentários de Dawkins no seu livro Deus, um Delírio
  93. Ir para cima↑ Documentário de Lee Strobell The Case for a Creator, comentários de Dembski.
  94. Ir para cima↑ Sewell, Granville. "Evolution's Thermodynamic Failure", The American Spectator, December 28, 2005. Página visitada em 2007-02-16. Also available from the Discovery Institute, retrieved on July 7, 2007.
  95. Ir para cima↑ Entropy, Disorder and Life TalkOrigins.org. Visitado em 2007-07-17.
  96. Ir para cima↑ "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." Discovery Institute. What is Intelligent Design? Questions About Intelligent Design
  97. Ir para cima↑ Dembski. The Act of Creation: Bridging Transcendence and Immanence
  98. ↑ Ir para:a b Coyne, Jerry (August 22-29, 2005), The New Republic 233 (8/9): pp. 21–33, title=The Case Against Intelligent Design.
  99. Ir para cima↑ Dr. Donald E. Simanek. Intelligent Design: The Glass is Empty
  100. Ir para cima↑ IDEA "One need not fully understand the origin or identity of the designer to determine that an object was designed. Thus, this question is essentially irrelevant to intelligent design theory, which merely seeks to detect if an object was designed ... Intelligent design theory cannot address the identity or origin of the designer—it is a philosophical / religious question that lies outside the domain of scientific inquiry. Christianity postulates the religious answer to this question that the designer is God who by definition is eternally existent and has no origin. There is no logical philosophical impossibility with this being the case (akin to Aristotle's 'unmoved mover') as a religious answer to the origin of the designer..." FAQ: Who designed the designer? FAQ: Who designed the designer?
  101. Ir para cima↑ Richard Wein. 2002. Not a Free Lunch But a Box of Chocolates
  102. ↑ Ir para:a b Who Designed the Designer? Jason Rosenhouse. Creation & Intelligent Design Watch, Committee for the Scientific Investigation of Claims of the Paranormal.
  103. Ir para cima↑ Richard Dawkins. The Blind Watchmaker: Why the Evidence of Evolution Reveals a Universe without Design pg 141
  104. Ir para cima↑ See, e.g., Joseph Manson, "Intelligent design is pseudoscience", UCLA Today Vol. 26. No.2 Sept. 27, 2005. [8]; Rev Max, "The Incredibly Strange Story of Intelligent Design",New Dawn Magazine No. 97 (July–August 2006)
  105. Ir para cima↑ NCSE Resource Evolving Banners at the Discovery Institute (August 29, 2002). Visitado em 2007-10-07.
  106. Ir para cima↑ "for most members of the mainstream scientific community, ID is not a scientific theory, but a creationist pseudoscience". Trojan Horse or Legitimate Science: Deconstructing the Debate over Intelligent Design, David Mu, Harvard Science Review, Volume 19, Issue 1, Fall 2005.
    • "Creationists are repackaging their message as the pseudoscience of intelligent design theory". Professional Ethics Report, American Association for the Advancement of Science, 2001.
    • Conclusion of Kitzmiller v. Dover Area School District Ruling
  107. Ir para cima↑ Wise, D.U., 2001, Creationism's Propaganda Assault on Deep Time and Evolution, Journal of Geoscience Education, v. 49, n. 1, p. 30–35.
  108. Ir para cima↑ Who Believes What? Clearing up Confusion over Intelligent Design and Young-Earth Creationism, Marcus R. Ross, Journal of Geoscience Education, v. 53, n. 3, May, 2005, p. 319–323
  109. Ir para cima↑ The Creationists: From Scientific Creationism to Intelligent Design, Expanded Edition,Ronald L. Numbers, Harvard University Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts, November 30, 2006, ISBN 0674023390.
  110. Ir para cima↑ Forrest, Barbara (May 2007). "Understanding the Intelligent Design Creationist Movement: Its True Nature and Goals. A Position Paper from the Center for Inquiry, Office of Public Policy" (PDF). Center for Inquiry, Inc.. Retrieved on 2007-08-22.; Forrest, B.C. and Gross, P.R., 2003, Evolution and the Wedge of Intelligent Design: The Trojan Horse Strategy, Oxford, Oxford University Press, 224 p., ISBN 0195157427
  111. Ir para cima↑ "Dembski chides me for never using the term "intelligent design" without conjoining it to "creationism". He implies (though never explicitly asserts) that he and others in his movement are not creationists and that it is incorrect to discuss them in such terms, suggesting that doing so is merely a rhetorical ploy to "rally the troops". (2) Am I (and the many others who see Dembski's movement in the same way) misrepresenting their position? The basic notion of creationism is the rejection of biological evolution in favor of special creation, where the latter is understood to be supernatural. Beyond this there is considerable variability...", from Wizards of ID: Reply to Dembski, Robert T. Pennock, p. 645–667 of Intelligent Design Creationism and Its Critics: Philosophical, Theological, and Scientific Perspectives, Robert T. Pennock (editor), Cambridge, MIT Press, 2001, 825 p.,ISBN 0262661241; Pennock, R.T., 1999, Tower of Babel: Evidence Against the New Creationism, Cambridge, MIT Press, 440 p.
  112. Ir para cima↑ The Creation/Evolution Continuum, Eugenie Scott, NCSE Reports, v. 19, n. 4, p. 16–17, 23–25, July/August, 1999.; Scott, E.C., 2004, Evolution vs. Creationism: An Introduction, Westport, Greenwood Press, 296p, ISBN 0520246500
  113. Ir para cima↑ "The social consequences of materialism have been devastating. As symptoms, those consequences are certainly worth treating. However, we are convinced that in order to defeat materialism, we must cut it off at its source. That source is scientific materialism. This is precisely our strategy. If we view the predominant materialistic science as a giant tree, our strategy is intended to function as a 'wedge' that, while relatively small, can split the trunk when applied at its weakest points. The very beginning of this strategy, the 'thin edge of the wedge,' was Phillip Johnson's critique of Darwinism begun in 1991 in Darwinism on Trial, and continued in Reason in the Balance and Defeating Darwinism by Opening Minds. Michael Behe's highly successful Darwin's Black Box followed Johnson's work. We are building on this momentum, broadening the wedge with a positive scientific alternative to materialistic scientific theories, which has come to be called the theory of intelligent design (ID). Design theory promises to reverse the stifling dominance of the materialist worldview, and to replace it with a science consonant with Christian and theistic convictions". Wedge Document Discovery Institute, 1999. (PDF file)
  114. ↑ Ir para:a b Wedge Document Discovery Institute, 1999.
  115. ↑ Ir para:a b c "I have built an intellectual movement in the universities and churches that we call The Wedge, which is devoted to scholarship and writing that furthers this program of questioning the materialistic basis of science. [...] Now the way that I see the logic of our movement going is like this. The first thing you understand is that the Darwinian theory isn't true. It's falsified by all of the evidence and the logic is terrible. When you realize that, the next question that occurs to you is, well, where might you get the truth? [...] I start with John 1:1. In the beginning was the word. In the beginning was intelligence, purpose, and wisdom. The Bible had that right. And the materialist scientists are deluding themselves." Johnson 1999. Reclaiming America for Christ Conference. How the Evolution Debate Can Be Won
  116. Ir para cima↑ Discovery Institute fellows and staff. [9] Center for Science and Culture fellows and staff. [10]
  117. Ir para cima↑ Barbara Forrest. 2001. "The Wedge at Work: Intelligent Design Creationism and Its Critics
  118. Ir para cima↑ "...intelligent design does not address metaphysical and religious questions such as the nature or identity of the designer," and "...the nature, moral character and purposes of this intelligence lie beyond the competence of science and must be left to religion and philosophy". In: Discovery Institute Truth Sheet # 09-05 Does intelligent design postulate a "supernatural creator?. Visitado em 2007-07-19.
  119. Ir para cima↑ Phillip Johnson. Keeping the Darwinists Honest, an interview with Phillip Johnson. Citizen Magazine. April 1999. "Intelligent Design is an intellectual movement, and the Wedge strategy stops working when we are seen as just another way of packaging the Christian evangelical message. [...] The evangelists do what they do very well, and I hope our work opens up for them some doors that have been closed".
  120. Ir para cima↑ Phillip Johnson. Touchstone: A Journal of Mere Christianity. July/August 1999."...the first thing that has to be done is to get the Bible out of the discussion. ...This is not to say that the biblical issues are unimportant; the point is rather that the time to address them will be after we have separated materialist prejudice from scientific fact". The Wedge
  121. Ir para cima↑ Bailey, Ronald. (July 1997). "Origin of the Specious". Reason.
  122. Ir para cima↑ William Dembski, 1998. The Design Inference.
  123. Ir para cima↑ Dembski, 1999. Intelligent Design: The Bridge Between Science and Theology, p. 210. "Christ is indispensable to any scientific theory, even if its practitioners don't have a clue about him. The pragmatics of a scientific theory can, to be sure, be pursued without recourse to Christ. But the conceptual soundness of the theory can in the end only be located in Christ."
  124. Ir para cima↑ Dembski. 2005. Intelligent Design's Contribution to the Debate Over Evolution: A Reply to Henry Morris.Reply to Henry Morris
  125. Ir para cima↑ Barbara Forrest. Expert Testimony. Kitzmiller v. Dover Area School District trial transcript, Day 6 (October 5) "What I am talking about is the essence of intelligent design, and the essence of it is theistic realism as defined by Professor Johnson. Now that stands on its own quite apart from what their motives are. I'm also talking about the definition of intelligent design by Dr. Dembski as the Logos theology of John's Gospel. That stands on its own. [...] Intelligent design, as it is understood by the proponents that we are discussing today, does involve a supernatural creator, and that is my objection. And I am objecting to it as they have defined it, as Professor Johnson has defined intelligent design, and as Dr. Dembski has defined intelligent design. And both of those are basically religious. They involve the supernatural".
  126. Ir para cima↑ Understanding the Intelligent Design Creationist Movement: Its True Nature and Goals. A Position Paper from the Center for Inquiry, Office of Public Policy Barbara Forrest. May, 2007.
  127. Ir para cima↑ Nearly Two-thirds of U.S. Adults Believe Human Beings Were Created by God The Harris Poll #52 Harris Interactive (July 6, 2005). Visitado em 2007-07-13.
  128. Ir para cima↑ Sandia National Laboratories says that the Intelligent Design Network (IDNet-NM/Zogby) "Lab Poll" is BOGUS! New Mexicans for Science and Reason. Visitado em 2007-07-13.
  129. Ir para cima↑ Mooney, Chris (September 11, 2003). Polling for ID Doubt and About Committee for Skeptical Inquiry. Visitado em 2007-02-16.
  130. Ir para cima↑ 'Intelligent Design'-ers launch new assault on curriculum using lies and deceptionSalon.com. Visitado em 2007-07-13.
  131. Ir para cima↑ According to the poll, 18% of the physicians believed that God created humans exactly as they appear today. Another 42% believed that God initiated and guided an evolutionary process that has led to current human beings. The poll also found that "an overwhelming majority of Jewish doctors (83%) and half of Catholic doctors (51%) believe that intelligent design is simply "a religiously inspired pseudo-science rather than a legitimate scientific speculation". The poll also found that "more than half of Protestant doctors (63%) believe that intelligent design is a "legitimate scientific speculation".
    Majority of Physicians Give the Nod to Evolution Over Intelligent Design. Visitado em 2007-10-08.
  132. Ir para cima↑ Shaw, Linda. "Does Seattle group "teach controversy" or contribute to it?", Seattle Times, March 31, 2005.
  133. Ir para cima↑ A Scientific Dissent From Darwinism (em inglês)
  134. Ir para cima↑ Project Steve | NCSE
  135. Ir para cima↑ Strange Bedfellows: Scientists and Christian clergy ally for science, but is it a bond made in heaven?, Maggie Wittlin, Science & Religion, Seed Magazine, March 24, 2006
  136. Ir para cima↑ The Clergy Letter Project.
  137. Ir para cima↑ NABT's Statement on Teaching Evolution National Association of Biology Teachers.Cópia arquivada em 2006-09-27.
  138. Ir para cima↑ IAP Statement on the Teaching of Evolution (PDF) The Interacademy Panel on International Issues (June 21, 2006). Visitado em 2008-10-17. Joint statement issued by the national science academies of 67 countries, including the United Kingdom's Royal Society.
  139. Ir para cima↑ From the world's largest general scientific society: .
  140. Ir para cima↑ Coultan, Mark. "Intelligent design a Trojan horse, says creationist", Sydney Morning Herald, November 27, 2005. Página visitada em 2007-07-29.
  141. Ir para cima↑ Intelligent Design: Creationism's Trojan Horse Americans United for the Separation of Church and State (February 2005). Visitado em 2007-07-29.
  142. Ir para cima↑ "The evolution wars" in Time National Center for Science Education (August 11, 2005). Visitado em 2008-10-17.
  143. Ir para cima↑ Forrest, Barbara. (Fall–Winter 2000). "Methodological Naturalism and Philosophical Naturalism: Clarifying the Connection". Philo 3 (2): 7–29.
  144. Ir para cima↑ Johnson, Phillip E.. Reason in the Balance: The Case Against Naturalism in Science, Law and Education. [S.l.]: InterVarsity Press, 1995. ISBN 0830819290. [Johnson positions himself as a "theistic realist" against "methodological naturalism".]
  145. Ir para cima↑ Phillip E. Johnson (August 31, 1996). Starting a Conversation about Evolution: Johnson, Phillip Access Research Network. Visitado em 2008-10-18. "My colleagues and I speak of 'theistic realism'—or sometimes, 'mere creation'—as the defining concept of our [the ID] movement. This means that we affirm that God is objectively real as Creator, and that the reality of God is tangibly recorded in evidence accessible to science, particularly in biology."
  146. Ir para cima↑ See, for instance: Vuletic, Mark I. (February 1997). Methodological Naturalism and the Supernatural Naturalism, Theism and the Scientific Enterprise: An Interdisciplinary Conference University of Texas, Austin. Visitado em 2007-07-27.
  147. Ir para cima↑ Watanabe, Teresa (March 25, 2001). Enlisting Science to Find the Fingerprints of a Creator Los Angeles Times. Visitado em 2007-07-22. "[Phillip E. Johnson quoted]: We are taking an intuition most people have and making it a scientific and academic enterprise ... We are removing the most important cultural roadblock to accepting the role of God as creator."
  148. Ir para cima↑ Belz, Joel. (November 30, 1996). "Witnesses For The Prosecution" (Reprint by Leadership U.). World Magazine 11 (28): 18.
  149. Ir para cima↑ Nickson, Elizabeth (January 10, 2003). Let's Be Intelligent About Darwin Christianity.caThe Evangelical Fellowship of Canada. Visitado em 2007-07-23. "[Phillip E. Johnson quoted]: Our strategy has been to change the subject a bit so that we can get the issue of Intelligent Design, which really means the reality of God, before the academic world and into the schools."
  150. Ir para cima↑ Buell, Jon; Hearn, Virginia, eds. (March 1992). Darwinism: Science or Philosophy(PDF) Darwinism: Scientific Inference or Philosophical Preference? (Symposium) The Foundation for Thought and Ethics, Dallas Christian Leadership, and the C. S. Lewis Fellowship. Visitado em 2007-07-23.
  151. Ir para cima↑ Giberson, Karl. Intelligent design's long march to nowhere. [S.l.]: Templeton Foundation,Science & Theology News, December 5, 2005. Visitado em 2007-07-23. [11]
  152. Ir para cima↑ Intelligent Design, Expelled Exposed, National Center for Science Education
  153. Ir para cima↑ Murray, Michael J. (Forthcoming). Natural Providence (or Design Trouble) (PDF) Franklin & Marshall College. Visitado em 2007-07-23.
  154. Ir para cima↑ Dembski, William A.. What is the position of the NRCSE on the teaching of intelligent design [ID] as an alternative to neo-Darwinian evolution in Nebraska schools? Creighton University. Visitado em 2007-07-23.
  155. Ir para cima↑ Schönborn, Cardinal Christoph (October 2, 2005). Catechetical Lecture at St. Stephan's Cathedral, Vienna (Reprint) Bring You To. Visitado em 2007-07-22. "Purpose and design in the natural world, [has] no difficulty [...] with the theory of evolution [within] the borders of scientific theory."
  156. Ir para cima↑ Scott, Eugenie C. (December 7, 2000). The Creation/Evolution Continuum National Center for Science Education. Visitado em 2007-07-22.
  157. Ir para cima↑ Resseger, Jan (Chair) (March 2006). Science, Religion, and the Teaching of Evolution in Public School Science Classes (PDF) Committee on Public Education and LiteracyNational Council of Churches. Visitado em 2007-07-17.
  158. Ir para cima↑ Murphy, George L. (2002). Intelligent Design as a Theological Problem (Reprint) Creighton University. Visitado em 2007-07-21.
  159. Ir para cima↑ Sheppard, Pam S. (February 4, 2006). Intelligent design: is it intelligent; is it Christian?Answers in Genesis. Visitado em 2007-07-21.
  160. Ir para cima↑ Ross, Hugh. More Than Intelligent Design Facts for Faith Reasons to Believe. Visitado em 2007-07-21.
  161. Ir para cima↑ The "Intelligent Design" Distraction Harun Yahya International (2007). Visitado em 2007-07-20.
  162. Ir para cima↑ Wieland, Carl (August 30, 2002). AiG's views on the Intelligent Design MovementAnswers in Genesis. Visitado em 2007-07-20.
  163. Ir para cima↑ Meyer, Stephen C. (December 1, 2002). The Scientific Status of Intelligent Design: The Methodological Equivalence of Naturalistic and Non-Naturalistic Origins Theories Center for Science and Culture, Discovery Institute. Visitado em 2007-07-19.
  164. Ir para cima↑ Wüthrich, Christian (January 11, 2007). Demarcating science vis-à-vis pseudoscience(PDF) Department of Philosophy University of California at San Diego. Visitado em 2007-07-19.
  165. Ir para cima↑ Gauch, Jr., Hugh G.. Scientific Method in Practice. [S.l.]: Cambridge UP, 2003. ISBN 0521017084. Discusses principles of induction, deduction and probability related to the expectation of consistency, testability, and multiple observations. Chapter 8 discusses parsimony (Occam's razor)
  166. Ir para cima↑ Elmes, David G.; Kantowitz, Barry H.; Roediger Henry L.. Research Methods in Psychology. 8th. ed. [S.l.]: Wadsworth Publishing, 2005. ISBN 0534609767. Discusses the scientific method, including the principles of falsifiability, testability, progressive development of theory, dynamic self-correcting of hypotheses, and parsimony, or "Occam's razor".
  167. Ir para cima↑ Kitzmiller v. Dover Area School District, 04 cv 2688 (December 20, 2005), 4: whether ID is science. The ruling discusses central aspects of expectations in the scientific community that a scientific theory be testable, dynamic, correctible, progressive, based upon multiple observations, and provisional,
  168. Ir para cima↑ See, e.g., Mark Perakh, "The Dream World of William Dembski's Creationism", in Skeptic Volume 11 (Number 4) 2005, 54–65. [12]
  169. Ir para cima↑ Intelligent design fails to pass Occam's razor. Adding entities (an intelligent agent, a designer) to the equation is not strictly necessary to explain events. See, e.g., Branden Fitelson, et al: "How Not to Detect Design–Critical Notice: William A. Dembski The Design Inference ", in Robert T. Pennock, ed. Intelligent Design Creationism and Its Critics: Philosophical, Theological, and Scientific Perspectives, (MIT Press, 2001) p597–616.
  170. Ir para cima↑ See, e.g., Jill E. Schneider (Dept. of Biological Sciences, Lehigh University, 2005) "Thoughts on Evolution and Intelligent Design" [13] "Q: Why couldn't intelligent design also be a scientific theory? A : The idea of intelligent design might or might not be true, but when presented as a scientific hypothesis, it is not useful because it is based on weak assumptions, lacks supporting data and terminates further thought".
  171. Ir para cima↑ The designer is not falsifiable, since its existence is typically asserted without sufficient conditions to allow a falsifying observation. The designer being beyond the realm of the observable, claims about its existence can be neither supported nor undermined by observation, making intelligent design and the argument from design analytic a posterioriarguments. See, e.g., Kitzmiller v. Dover Area School District, 04 cv 2688 (December 20, 2005). Ruling, p. 22 and p. 77.
  172. Ir para cima↑ That intelligent design is not empirically testable stems from the fact that it violates a basic premise of science, naturalism. See, e.g., Kitzmiller v. Dover Area School District, 04 cv 2688 (December 20, 2005). Ruling, p. 22 and p. 66.
  173. Ir para cima↑ Intelligent design professes to offer an answer that does not need to be defined or explained, the intelligent agent, designer. By asserting a conclusion that cannot be accounted for scientifically, the designer, intelligent design cannot be sustained by any further explanation, and objections raised to those who accept intelligent design make little headway. Thus intelligent design is not a provisional assessment of data which can change when new information is discovered. Once it is claimed that a conclusion that need not be accounted for has been established, there is simply no possibility of future correction. The idea of the progressive growth of scientific ideas is required to explain previous data and any previously unexplainable data. See, e.g., the brief explanation in Kitzmiller v. Dover Area School District, 04 cv 2688 (December 20, 2005). p. 66.
  174. Ir para cima↑ Nobel Laureates Initiative (PDF) The Elie Wiesel Foundation for Humanity (September 9, 2005). Visitado em 2007-07-19. The September 2005 statement by 38 Nobel laureatesstated that: "Intelligent design is fundamentally unscientific; it cannot be tested as scientific theory because its central conclusion is based on belief in the intervention of a supernatural agent".
  175. Ir para cima↑ Intelligent Design is not Science: Scientists and teachers speak out University of New South Wales (October 2005). Visitado em 2009-01-09. The October 2005 statement, by a coalition representing more than 70,000 Australian scientists and science teachers said: "intelligent design is not science" and called on "all schools not to teach Intelligent Design (ID) as science, because it fails to qualify on every count as a scientific theory".
  176. Ir para cima↑ Creationism and the Daubert test? PZ Myers, Pharyngula.org (May 21, 2005).
  177. ↑ Ir para:a b c Kitzmiller v. Dover Area School District, 04 cv 2688 (December 20, 2005). 4. Whether ID is Science, p. 87
  178. Ir para cima↑ Hawks, John (August 2005). The President and the teaching of evolution John Hawks Weblog. Visitado em 2007-07-19.
  179. Ir para cima↑ Skeptic: eSkeptic: Thursday, April 17th, 2008
  180. Ir para cima↑ Goodstein, Laurie (December 4, 2005). Intelligent Design Might Be Meeting Its MakerThe New York Times. Visitado em 2007-07-19.
  181. Ir para cima↑ Meyer, S.C.. (2004). "The origin of biological information and the higher taxonomic categories". Proceedings of the Biological Society of Washington 117 (2): 213–239.
  182. Ir para cima↑ The Sternberg peer review controversy and several similar academic disputes are the subject of the 2008 documentary "Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed".
  183. Ir para cima↑ Statement from the Council of the Biological Society of Washington Biological Society of Washington. Visitado em 2007-07-19.
  184. Ir para cima↑ Dembski, William A. (2001). Is Intelligent Design a Form of Natural Theology? Design Inference Website. Visitado em 2007-07-19.
  185. Ir para cima↑ Página pessoal do Dr. Richard Sternberg (em inglês)
  186. Ir para cima↑ Sternberg vs. Smithsonian - The Panda's Thumb pandasthumb.org. Visitado em 2008-11-29.
  187. Ir para cima↑ McMurtie, Beth (2001). Darwinism Under Attack The Chronicle Of Higher Education.
  188. Ir para cima↑ Kitzmiller v. Dover Area School District, October 19, 2005, AM session Kitzmiller Testimony, Behe
  189. Ir para cima↑ Peer-Reviewed, Peer-Edited, and other Scientific Publications Supporting the Theory of Intelligent Design (Annotated) Discovery Institute (July 2007). Visitado em 2007-07-17.
  190. Ir para cima↑ Isaak, Mark (2006). Index to Creationist Claims The TalkOrigins Archive. "With some of the claims for peer review, notably Campbell and Meyer (2003) and the e-journal PCID, the reviewers are themselves ardent supporters of intelligent design. The purpose of peer review is to expose errors, weaknesses, and significant omissions in fact and argument. That purpose is not served if the reviewers are uncritical"
  191. Ir para cima↑ Brauer, Matthew J.; Forrest, Barbara; Gey Steven G.. (2005). "Is It Science Yet?: Intelligent Design Creationism and the Constitution" (PDF). Washington University Law Quarterly 83 (1).
  192. Ir para cima↑ Dembski, William A. (April 2002). Detecting Design in the Natural Sciences Intelligent Design? Natural History Magazine. Visitado em 2007-07-18.
  193. Ir para cima↑ Shostak, Seth (December 2005). SETI and Intelligent Design Space.com. Visitado em 2007-07-18. "In fact, the signals actually sought by today's SETI searches are not complex, as the ID advocates assume. [...] If SETI were to announce that we're not alone because it had detected a signal, it would be on the basis of artificiality"
  194. Ir para cima↑ "For human artifacts, we know the designer's identity, human, and the mechanism of design, as we have experience based upon empirical evidence that humans can make such things, as well as many other attributes including the designer's abilities, needs, and desires. With ID, proponents assert that they refuse to propose hypotheses on the designer's identity, do not propose a mechanism, and the designer, he/she/it/they, has never been seen. In that vein, defense expert Professor Minnich agreed that in the case of human artifacts and objects, we know the identity and capacities of the human designer, but we do not know any of those attributes for the designer of biological life. In addition, Professor Behe agreed that for the design of human artifacts, we know the designer and its attributes and we have a baseline for human design that does not exist for design of biological systems. Professor Behe's only response to these seemingly insurmountable points of disanalogy was that the inference still works in science fiction movies".— Kitzmiller v. Dover Area School District, 04 cv 2688 (December 20, 2005)., p. 81
  195. Ir para cima↑ Edis, Taner (March/April 2001). Darwin in Mind: Intelligent Design Meets Artificial Intelligence Skeptical Inquirer Magazine. Visitado em 2007-07-17.
  196. Ir para cima↑ Primer: Intelligent Design Theory in a Nutshell Intelligent Design and Evolution Awareness Center (2007). Visitado em 2007-07-14.
  197. ↑ Ir para:a b Scott, Eugenie C.; Branch, Glenn (September 2002). "Intelligent Design" Not Accepted by Most Scientists National Center for Science Education. Visitado em 2007-07-14.
  198. Ir para cima↑ See, for instance: Hube, Richard H.. (Fall 1971). "Man Come Of Age: Bonhoeffer's Response To The God-Of-The-Gaps". Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 14: 203–220.
  199. Ir para cima↑ Norman Geisler & Turek "I Don't Have Enough Faith to be an Atheist". Ed.2°. Crossway Books, 2004.
  200. Ir para cima↑ Tammy Kitzmiller, et al. v. Dover Area School District, et al.
  201. Ir para cima↑ Powell, Michael. "Judge Rules Against 'Intelligent Design'", The Washington Post, December 21, 2005. Página visitada em 2007-09-03.
  202. Ir para cima↑ Crowther, Robert (December 20, 2005). Dover Intelligent Design Decision Criticized as a Futile Attempt to Censor Science Education Evolution News & Views Discovery Institute. Visitado em 2007-09-03.
  203. Ir para cima↑ Associated Press. "Judge rules against 'intelligent design'", MSNBC, December 20, 2005. Página visitada em 2008-10-17.
  204. Ir para cima↑ Provonsha, Matthew (September 21, 2006). Godless: The Church of LiberalismeSkeptic. Visitado em 2007-09-03.
  205. Ir para cima↑ Padian, Kevin; Nick Matzke (January 4, 2006). Discovery Institute tries to "swift-boat" Judge Jones National Center for Science Education. Visitado em 2007-09-03.
  206. Ir para cima↑ Raffaele, Martha. "Intelligent design policy struck down", Dallas Morning News, December 20, 2005. Página visitada em 2007-09-03.
  207. Ir para cima↑ (April 10, 2007) "Articles: Editor's Note: Intelligent Design Articles" (PDF). University of Montana Law Review 68 (1).
  208. Ir para cima↑ DeWolf, David K; West, Johng G; Luskin, Casey. (May 4, 2007). "Intelligent Design Will Survive Kitzmiller v. Dover" (PDF). University of Montana Law Review 68 (1).
  209. Ir para cima↑ Irons, Peter. (April 27, 2007). "Disaster In Dover: The Trials (And Tribulations) Of Intelligent Design" (PDF). University of Montana Law Review 68 (1).
  210. Ir para cima↑ DeWolf, David K; West, John G; Luskin, Casey. (April 27, 2007). "Rebuttal to Irons" (PDF). University of Montana Law Review 68 (1).
  211. Ir para cima↑ The dangers of creationism in education Council of Europe. Visitado em 2007-08-03.
  212. Ir para cima↑ NCSE Resource—Council of Europe approves resolution against creationism National Center for Science Education (October 4, 2007). Visitado em 2007-10-05.
  213. Ir para cima↑ WIRED Magazine response Illustra Media. Visitado em 2007-07-13. "It's also important that you read a well developed rebuttal to Wired's misleading accusations. Links to both the article and a response by the Discovery Institute (our partners in the production of Unlocking the Mystery of Life and The Privileged Planet)"
  214. Ir para cima↑ Meyer, Stephen C.; Allen, W. Peter (July 15, 2004). Unlocking the Mystery of LifeCenter for Science and Culture, Discovery Institute. Visitado em 2007-07-13.
  215. Ir para cima↑ Randerson, James (November 27, 2006). Revealed: rise of creationism in UK schoolsThe Guardian. Visitado em 2008-10-17.
  216. Ir para cima↑ 'Design' attack on school science BBC News (September 29, 2006). Visitado em 2007-07-13.
  217. Ir para cima↑ Written Answers Daily Hansard Parliament of the United Kingdom (November 1, 2006). Visitado em 2007-07-13.
  218. Ir para cima↑ Schools: Intelligent Design Daily Hansard Parliament of the United Kingdom(December 18, 2006). Visitado em 2007-07-13.
  219. ↑ Ir para:a b NCSE Resource—Guidance on creationism for British teachers NCSE (September 25, 2007). Visitado em 2007-09-30.
  220. Ir para cima↑ How can we answer questions about creation and origins? (PDF) Qualifications and Curriculum Authority for England (2006). Visitado em 2007-10-01.
  221. Ir para cima↑ NoCreSciEd - epetition reply Her Majesty's Stationery Office. Visitado em 2007-07-13.
  222. Ir para cima↑ Lengagne, Guy (June 8, 2007). The dangers of creationism in education Committee on Culture, Science and Education, Socialist Group, Parliamentary Assembly Council of Europe, Doc. 11297. Visitado em 2008-10-17.
  223. Ir para cima↑ Henry, Lesley-Anne (September 26, 2007). Tussle of Biblical proportions over creationism in Ulster classrooms - Education - News - Belfast Telegraph Belfast Telegraph. Visitado em 2007-10-01.
    * Viewpoint: The world, according to Lisburn folk - Opinion - News - Belfast TelegraphBelfast Telegraph (September 27, 2007). Visitado em 2007-10-01.
  224. Ir para cima↑ Dup Call For Schools To Teach Creation Passed By Council—Lisburn Today Ulster Star (September 26, 2007). Visitado em 2008-10-17.
  225. Ir para cima↑ Enserink, Martin. (June 3, 2005). "Evolution Politics: Is Holland Becoming the Kansas of Europe?". Science 308 (5727): 1394. DOI:10.1126/science.308.5727.1394b. PMID 15933170.
  226. Ir para cima↑ Cabinet ministers announced (update 2) DutchNews.nl (February 13, 2007). Visitado em 2008-05-31.
  227. Ir para cima↑ De Morgen, May 23, 2005
  228. ↑ Ir para:a b Edis, Taner (January 2008). The History of Science Society : The Society Islamic Creationism: A Short History Newsletter, Vol. 37, No.1 pp. History of Science Society. Visitado em 2008-02-23.
  229. Ir para cima↑ Edis, Taner. Cloning Creationism in Turkey National Center for Science Education. Visitado em 2007-07-13.
  230. Ir para cima↑ Jones, Dorian L (March 12, 2008). Turkey's survival of the fittest ISN Security Watch. Visitado em 2008-03-13.
  231. Ir para cima↑ Smith, Deborah. "Intelligent design not science: experts", Sydney Morning Herald, October 21, 2005. Página visitada em 2007-07-13.

Bibliografia[editar | editar código-fonte]

(em português)
  • A Caixa-Preta de Darwin: O Desafio da Bioquímica à Teoria da Evolução por Michael J. Behe.
  • A Ideia Perigosa de Darwin (1995) por Daniel C. Dennett.
(em inglês)
  • The Politically Incorrect Guide to Darwinism and Intelligent Design por Johathan Wells.
  • Darwin's Black Box: The Biochemical Challenge to Evolution por Michael J. Behe.
  • Evolution: A Theory In Crisis por Michael Denton.
  • Nature's Destiny: How the Laws of Biology Reveal Purpose in the Universe por Michael Denton.
  • DEMBISK, William, The Design of Life: Discovering Signs of Intelligence In Biological Systems, ISBN 978-0980021301
  • MEYER, Stephen C., Signature in the Cell: DNA and the Evidence for Intelligent Design, ISBN 978-0061472794

Ver também[editar | editar código-fonte]

Ligações externas[editar | editar código-fonte]

Pró-Design Inteligente
Contra o Design Inteligente
Artigos da mídia


http://pt.wikipedia.org/wiki/Design_inteligente
Marcadores: