Young, Matt; Edis, Taner (red.), 2004- Why Intelligent Design Fails. A Scientific Critique of the New Creationism

Taner Edis, Chance and Necessity – and Intelligent Design? w: Why Intelligent
Design Fails: A Scientific Critique of the New Creationism, red. M. Young, T. Edis
(Rutgers University Press 2004), s. 139–142. Edis argumentuje, że mechanizmy
naturalistyczne (przypadek + konieczność) są wystarczająco twórcze, by wyjaśnić
złożoność biologiczną i kosmiczną bez odwoływania się do nadprzyrodzonego
projektu.

Taner Edis, Illusion of Harmony: Science and Religion in Islam (Prometheus 2007),
s. 45. Edis krytykuje tu szerzej teorie inteligentnego projektu, nazywając ich
twierdzenia „ekstrawaganckimi” i niewspartymi empirycznie. Por. też T. Edis, Why
Intelligent Design Fails, op. cit., rozdz. 10: Chance and Necessity—and Intelligent
Design?, gdzie wskazuje, że zwolennicy ID nie dostarczyli pozytywnych dowodów
na istnienie projektu, poza wskazywaniem palcem na luki w wiedzy naukowej.

Young Edis, Why Intelligent Design Fails a Scientific…, op. cit., s. 4: “Behe identifies,
for example, the bacterial flagellum and the blood-clotting system as irreducibly
complex. To prove his point, he relies heavily on the analogy of a mousetrap, which
he says cannot function with any one of several parts missing. Behe's argument
founders, however, on the pretense that the irreducibly complex components came
together at once and in their present form; he makes no effort to show that they could
not have coevolved.”

Young Edis, Why Intelligent Design Fails a Scientific…, op. cit., s. 3: “A few states,
such as Arkansas in 1981, passed ‘balanced-treatment’ acts. Arkansas's act required
that public schools teach creation science, the new name for flood geology, as a viable
alternative to evolution. In 1982, Judge William Overton ruled that creation science
was not science but religion and that teaching creation science was unconstitutional.
Finally, the 1987 Supreme Court ruling, Edwards v. Aguillard, signaled the end of
creation science as a force in the public schools[…] Johnson named his next book
The Wedge of Truth (2000) after the wedge strategy, which was spawned at the
institute. According to a leaked document titled “The Wedge Strategy” (anonymous
n.d.), whose validity has been established by Barbara Forrest (2001), the goal of the
wedge is nothing less than the overthrow of materialism. The thin edge of the wedge
was Johnson's book, Darwin on Trial. […] take legal action to inject intelligent-
design theory into the public schools.”

Young Edis, Why Intelligent Design …, op. cit., s. 5: “the laws of thermodynamics do
not preclude self-organization, provided that there is energy flow through the system.
In addition to energy flow (an open system), self-organization requires only a
collection of suitable components such as atoms or molecules, cells, organisms (for
example, an insect in an insect society), and even the stellar components of galaxies,
which selforganize through gravitational energy into giant rotating spirals.”