Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Intelligent design: Who has designs on your students' minds?
Nature.com ^ | 28 April 2005 | Geoff Brumfiel

Posted on 01/11/2006 2:50:12 PM PST by cougar_mccxxi

The intelligent-design movement is a small but growing force on US university campuses. For some it bridges the gap between science and faith, for others it goes beyond the pale. Geoff Brumfiel meets the movement's vanguard.

For a cold Tuesday night in March, the turnout is surprisingly good. Twenty or so fresh-faced college students are gathered together in a room in the student union at George Mason University in Fairfax, Virginia, the state's largest public university. They are there for the first meeting of Salvador Cordova's Intelligent Design and Evolution Awareness (IDEA) club.

(Excerpt) Read more at nature.com ...


TOPICS: Culture/Society
KEYWORDS: crevolist; design; designs; has; intelligent; minds; on; students; who; your

1 posted on 01/11/2006 2:50:14 PM PST by cougar_mccxxi
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: cougar_mccxxi

Uh, oh. Here we go ...


2 posted on 01/11/2006 2:52:51 PM PST by manwiththehands (Good news for America = bad news for DemocRats)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: cougar_mccxxi; PatrickHenry
Back at George Mason, Cordova is wrapping up his lecture, and planning his next steps for promoting intelligent design on campus...Next year, he plans to apply to study cosmology at graduate school.

After the Dover decision, he'd better apply to study cosmetology instead.

3 posted on 01/11/2006 2:55:54 PM PST by peyton randolph (As long is it does me no harm, I don't care if one worships Elmer Fudd.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: peyton randolph; Junior
I've already deployed the ping list enough today. I don't want to cause "ping fatigue." This is published in Nature, which makes it worth while. Perhaps I'll ping in the morning ...
4 posted on 01/11/2006 3:02:11 PM PST by PatrickHenry (Felix, qui potuit rerum cognoscere causas.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: cougar_mccxxi
Intelligent design is not a science. It plays upon what is NOT known and the "opinions" of how what is not know may be (conjecture with out observation).
5 posted on 01/11/2006 3:07:08 PM PST by Tinman73 (Human nature requires We forget the terrible things We see. A truly intelligent person remembers it)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: peyton randolph
Back at George Mason, Cordova is wrapping up his lecture, and planning his next steps for promoting intelligent design on campus...Next year, he plans to apply to study cosmology at graduate school.

Maybe he'll do a nice dissertation saying the big bang is all bunk??? Only need one reference, so the whole thing would probably fit all on one page, don't you think?

6 posted on 01/11/2006 3:34:39 PM PST by Coyoteman (I love the sound of beta decay in the morning!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: cougar_mccxxi
The intelligent-design movement is a small but growing force ... the turnout is surprisingly good. Twenty or so fresh-faced college students are gathered together

Twenty students? Is that it? Some kind of "growing force" that is.

7 posted on 01/11/2006 4:46:39 PM PST by narby (Hillary! The Wicked Witch of the Left)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Tinman73
Intelligent design is not a science. It plays upon what is NOT known and the "opinions" of how what is not know may be ...

As opposed to the evolution-only folks, who believe that the history of biology is just a series of lucky, lucky events. Take the following description of how human vision works:

When light first strikes the retina, a photon interacts with a molecule called 11-cis-retinal, which rearranges within picoseconds to trans-retinal. The change in the shape of retinal forces a change in the shape of the protein, rhodopsin, to which the retinal is tightly bound. The protein's metamorphosis alters its behavior, making it stick to another protein called transducin. Before bumping into activated rhodopsin, transducin had tightly bound a small molecule called GDP. But when transducin interacts with activated rhodopsin, the GDP falls off and a molecule called GTP binds to transducin. (GTP is closely related to, but critically different from, GDP.)

GTP-transducin-activated rhodopsin now binds to a protein called phosphodiesterase, located in the inner membrane of the cell. When attached to activated rhodopsin and its entourage, the phosphodiesterase acquires the ability to chemically cut a molecule called cGMP (a chemical relative of both GDP and GTP). Initially there are a lot of cGMP molecules in the cell, but the phosphodiesterase lowers its concentration, like a pulled plug lowers the water level in a bathtub.

Another membrane protein that binds cGMP is called an ion channel. It acts as a gateway that regulates the number of sodium ions in the cell. Normally the ion channel allows sodium ions to flow into the cell, while a separate protein actively pumps them out again. The dual action of the ion channel and pump keeps the level of sodium ions in the cell within a narrow range. When the amount of cGMP is reduced because of cleavage by the phosphodiesterase, the ion channel closes, causing the cellular concentration of positively charged sodium ions to be reduced. This causes an imbalance of charge across the cell membrane which, finally, causes a current to be transmitted down the optic nerve to the brain. The result, when interpreted by the brain, is vision.

Can evolution really tell me HOW all those chemicals got to the right place at the time? Did a jiggly bug 500 million years ago just happen to create phosphodiesterase one day and pass it from generation to generation until whatever species it eventually evolved to had a use for it? Nope, evolution-fanatics CAN'T tell us that but rather give their opinions, which makes it just as much "science" as Intelligent Design. Not only that, but the opinions offered tend to be on the "and that's how the tiger got his stripes" level with a few technical words to scare the non-scientists. For human vision, the "that's how the tiger got his stripes" story probably goes something like this:

Once upon a time, a very lucky and special bacteria had a spot on it that was sensitive to light. We'll call it a chromosphere. Never mind where the spot came from or why it was sensitive to light or even why it was a vitamin-A derivative, because the bacteria had never taken any vitamin-A tablets. But that special spot gave the lucky, lucky bacteria to avoid being eaten by the Blind Blue Meanie bacteria, and thus lived longer and had more babies. This was, of course, during the time of the Cambrian explosion, which was a very lucky time. As the animal evolved, more and more chemicals came along and made vision even better. For a while, the photoreceptors were wired into the creature's big toe, but that didn't work and the photoreceptors, in a stroke of luck, wired themselves into the brain.

Throw in a few more fancy words, have it peer-reviewed by people who would be ostracised if they got suspicious about how many times luck intervened, and you now have a credible theory of the evolution of vision.

For what it's worth, I believe that evolution is a fact and that animals and plants have evolved into new species to function better within their environment. However, my education is in chemistry and chemistry involves just a little more than saying, "That hand looks like that flipper so the hand must have evolved from the flipper." Winning the lottery once is due to chance. Winning the 50 weeks in a row points implies that something other than chance is behind the winnings, no matter how much the lottery judges protest.


8 posted on 01/11/2006 4:51:13 PM PST by DallasMike (Call me Dallasaurus)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: DallasMike
DallasMike,

The theory of natural selection, before the discovery of DNA, caused scientists to speculate on the nature and mechanism of natural selection. The result was a prediction, that the living cell would have some kind of information storage, a gene, that tell the cell how to grow and replicate. Random errors in copying the gene are the cause of genetic diversification, and the interaction of the organism with the environment the cause of selection.

So, the search was on for this predicted information storage device, and sure enough, it was found in DNA. It was big deal, and the discovery got Watson and Crick a Nobel prize.

What testable prediction does "Intelligent Design" make? A designer? Go find him! Bring him to me so I can nail him to a dead tree.

C.W.
9 posted on 01/11/2006 5:24:28 PM PST by colderwater
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: DallasMike
...that something other than chance ...

Natural selection, anyone?

10 posted on 01/11/2006 5:57:29 PM PST by Virginia-American
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: DallasMike
For what it's worth, I believe that evolution is a fact and that animals and plants have evolved into new species to function better within their environment.

With your description of the design of the the eye this statement seems really strange. Can you elaborate?

11 posted on 01/11/2006 8:10:29 PM PST by Bellflower
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: DallasMike
"Can evolution really tell me HOW all those chemicals got to the right place at the time? Did a jiggly bug 500 million years ago just happen to create phosphodiesterase one day and pass it from generation to generation until whatever species it eventually evolved to had a use for it?"

Your presentation portrays the vision system as some unique system unrelated to any other biological system. Light driven ion pumps occur in bacteria. Halobacter halobium contains a similar system with a proton pump, as far as the molecules go. Ion channels and transmembrane pumps are not unique here either. The 7 helix bundle transmenbrane glycoprotein with 20-28 hydrophobic amino acids is a common receptor motif. It occurs in rhodopsin, a2adrenoreceptors and muscarinic acetylcholine receptors of nerve synapses. Phosphodiesterase is also common, as is the cGDP. cGMP is a common regulator of ion channel conductance, glycogenolysis, and cellular apoptosis. It also relaxes smooth muscle tissues. In blood vessels, relaxation of vascular smooth muscles lead to vasodilation and increased blood flow.

There's no luck, or design involved in the creation of these systems. They develop as allowed by changes that occur to the cellular system, principally to the DNA coded blueprint. Ignoring, or otherwise failing to note the commonalities and similarities will certainly lead to obfuscation and a failure to understand how evolution works. Your vision mechanism occured in one cell with componenets common and similar to those found elsewhere.

12 posted on 01/11/2006 9:23:47 PM PST by spunkets
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: DallasMike
Let me say that you have a great knowledge of the Chemistry of Vision process.

As for the Question "Can evolution really tell me HOW all those chemicals got to the right place at the time? "

Basically (and simply), it all matters on Statistics. Given the multitude of the multi cell organisms during the Cambrian explosion (and early explosions with chemical combinations) viable combinations will survive and the non viable ones die out.
An optical system the only senses, say ultra violet light band, Is only as good as the food source that emits this light band. Have that food source in the area that does not emit this light band die out through change in environment or over feeding, and the organism that senses it dies out. You would just think that the organism would evolve to a different light band to continue on. But, this is already a multi cell organism and evolution is harder to achieve due to a slower reproductive cycle.

Another view could be given at the Viral level (non multi cell) due to it's high reproductive cycle.

Let's look at the "Bird to Man" evolution going on with the "Bird Flu" Virus present day. All it takes is the statistical probability for the amount of infected humans that will modify the virus to become more effective for communication between humans. The more it can reproduce in this environment, the more viable it will become in human hosts. Add that the immune systems of some of the hosts will evolve to fight this virus (a war if you like). Who will win, the one that is best to evolve and keep the reproduction process going at a higher rate.

Yes, evolution is still happening today.

I am not a highly educated person, and (without sarcasm) I can see that you are. But I look at the big picture of the universe and to just fill in the unknown with the phrase "I don't understand it because I don't know (at this time) how that can happen" with "Someone is causing this to happen" is a little to easy. It takes work to find an answer.
13 posted on 01/12/2006 6:16:23 AM PST by Tinman73 (Human nature requires We forget the terrible things We see. A truly intelligent person remembers it)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson