I've waited several minutes over a high speed connection, and no document. Could you post the abstract?
It finally arrived here, and it wasn't worth the wait. And the paper contains no abstract, which is pretty sloppy.
It's just a wordier rehash of the usual creationist nonsense, including one of my favorites, the false assertion that genetic algorithms only work because "intelligence" is "preprogrammed into" them and they won't work without a pre-determined "goal".
The conclusion of the paper is a real hoot:
An experience-based analysis of the causal powers of various explanatory hypotheses suggests purposive or intelligent design as a causally adequate -- and perhaps the most causally adequate -- explanation for the origin of the complex specified information required to build the Cambrian animals and the novel forms they represent. For this reason, recent scientific interest in the design hypothesis is unlikely to abate as biologists continue to wrestle with the problem of the origination of biological form and the the higher taxa.In short, he's saying, "because I'm most familiar with the products of human intelligence, my gut tells me that maybe something intelligent may have made life on Earth. This idea needs more work."
For that he needed twenty one pages of article and five pages of footnotes?
Hardly a decisive, earth-shattering, or original contribution to the field, eh?