Stephen C. Meyer - The Scientific Basis For Intelligent Design - video
Stephen C. Meyer - The Scientific Basis For Intelligent Design - video
Stephen C. Meyer - Signature In The Cell:
"DNA functions like a software program," "We know from experience that software comes from programmers. Information--whether inscribed in hieroglyphics, written in a book or encoded in a radio signal--always arises from an intelligent source. So the discovery of digital code in DNA provides evidence that the information in DNA also had an intelligent source."
Michael Behe on Falsifying Intelligent Design - video
,,,we must concede that there are presently no detailed Darwinian accounts of the evolution of any biochemical or cellular system, only a variety of wishful speculations.’
Franklin M. Harold,* 2001. The way of the cell: molecules, organisms and the order of life, Oxford University Press, New York, p. 205.
*Professor Emeritus of Biochemistry, Colorado State University, USA
Michael Behe - No Scientific Literature For Evolution of Any Irreducibly Complex Molecular Machines
Astonishingly, actual motors, which far surpass man-made motors in 'engineering parameters', are now being found inside 'simple cells'.
Bacterial Flagellum - A Sheer Wonder Of Intelligent Design - video
Bacterial Flagella: A Paradigm for Design – Scott Minnich – Video
Articles and Videos on Molecular Motors
There are no detailed Darwinian accounts for the evolution of any fundamental biochemical or cellular system only a variety of wishful speculations. It is remarkable that Darwinism is accepted as a satisfactory explanation of such a vast subject."
James Shapiro - Molecular Biologist
“The response I have received from repeating Behe's claim about the evolutionary literature, which simply brings out the point being made implicitly by many others, such as Chris Dutton and so on, is that I obviously have not read the right books. There are, I am sure, evolutionists who have described how the transitions in question could have occurred.” And he continues, “When I ask in which books I can find these discussions, however, I either get no answer or else some titles that, upon examination, do not, in fact, contain the promised accounts. That such accounts exist seems to be something that is widely known, but I have yet to encounter anyone who knows where they exist.”
David Ray Griffin - retired professor of philosophy of religion and theology
Michael Behe - Life Reeks Of Design - 2010 - video
William Dembski PhD., and Robert Marks PhD., website with peer reviewed 'Conservation Of Information' Papers (caution heavy math):
Dr. Behe states in The Edge of Evolution on page 135:
"Generating a single new cellular protein-protein binding site (in other words, generating a truly beneficial mutational event that would actually explain the generation of the complex molecular machinery we see in life) is of the same order of difficulty or worse than the development of chloroquine resistance in the malarial parasite."
That order of difficulty is put at 10^20 replications of the malarial parasite by Dr. Behe. This number comes from direct empirical observation.
Richard Dawkins’ The Greatest Show on Earth Shies Away from Intelligent Design but Unwittingly Vindicates Michael Behe - Oct. 2009
Excerpt: The rarity of chloroquine resistance is not in question. In fact, Behe’s statistic that it occurs only once in every 10^20 cases was derived from public health statistical data, published by an authority in the Journal of Clinical Investigation. The extreme rareness of chloroquine resistance is not a negotiable data point; it is an observed fact.
Waiting Longer for Two Mutations - Michael J. Behe
Excerpt: Citing malaria literature sources (White 2004) I had noted that the de novo appearance of chloroquine resistance in Plasmodium falciparum was an event of probability of 1 in 10^20. I then wrote that ‘‘for humans to achieve a mutation like this by chance, we would have to wait 100 million times 10 million years’’ (Behe 2007) (because that is the extrapolated time that it would take to produce 10^20 humans). Durrett and Schmidt (2008, p. 1507) retort that my number ‘‘is 5 million times larger than the calculation we have just given’’ using their model (which nonetheless "using their model" gives a prohibitively long waiting time of 216 million years). Their criticism compares apples to oranges. My figure of 10^20 is an empirical statistic from the literature; it is not, as their calculation is, a theoretical estimate from a population genetics model.
This following calculation by geneticist John Sanford for 'fixing' a beneficial mutation, or for creating a new gene, in humans, gives equally absurd numbers that once again render the Darwinian scenario of humans evolving from apes completely false:
Dr. Sanford calculates it would take 12 million years to “fix” a single base pair mutation into a population. He further calculates that to create a gene with 1000 base pairs, it would take 12 million x 1000 or 12 billion years. This is obviously too slow to support the creation of the human genome containing 3 billion base pairs.
Whale Evolution Vs. Population Genetics - Richard Sternberg PhD. in Evolutionary Biology - video
Materialists simply do not have the 'beneficial' mutations they need to make evolution work. The following site has numerous quotes, studies and videos which reveal the overwhelmingly negative mutation rate which has been found in life:
Mutation Studies, Videos, And Quotes
An Atheist Interviews Michael Behe About "The Edge Of Evolution" - video
Michael Behe's Amazon Blog
Michael Behe - bio. and list of peer reviewed papers:
Should Intelligent Design Be Taught as Science? Michael Behe debates Stephen Barr - 2010 - video
Main page - with audio of debate
Peer-Reviewed & Peer-Edited Scientific Publications Supporting the Theory of Intelligent Design (Annotated) - updated regularly
The DNA Code - Solid Scientific Proof Of Intelligent Design - Perry Marshall - video
The current materialistic argument essentially appears to be like this:
Premise One: No materialistic cause of specified complex information is known.
Conclusion: Therefore, it must arise from some unknown materialistic cause.
On the other hand, Stephen Meyer describes the intelligent design argument as follows:
“Premise One: Despite a thorough search, no material causes have been discovered that demonstrate the power to produce large amounts of specified information.
“Premise Two: Intelligent causes have demonstrated the power to produce large amounts of specified information.
“Conclusion: Intelligent design constitutes the best, most causally adequate, explanation for the information in the cell.”
Stephen Meyer - Extreme Rarity of Functional Proteins And Higher Level Information For Body Plans - video
This following video is a bit more clear for explaining exactly why mutations to the DNA do not control Body Plan morphogenesis, since the mutations are the ‘bottom rung of the ladder’ as far as the 'higher levels of the layered information’ of the cell are concerned:
Stephen Meyer on Craig Venter, Complexity Of The Cell & Layered Information
Intelligent Design - The Anthropic Hypothesis