whyevolutionistrue | Here’s Discovery Institute Fellow Paul Nelson—who lives in Chicago
and sometimes creeps me out by depositing Intelligent Design propaganda
in my departmental mailbox—using a novel (but stupid) argument for
Intelligent Design, aka God’s Handiwork. It’s based on embryology and
teleology. Have a look at this 9.5-minute video on nematode development,
which distorts the cool developmental biology of the worm (work that
garnered a Nobel Prize) to make it seem like evidence for Design.
All the biology is accurate up to 4:58, although a bit repetitive,
but that’s where Nelson begins to slip off the rails and argue that
development can’t be explained by evolution because embryology looks
like it has foresight—ergo Jebus. As he says, “The case for
design could not be made more explicit.” But the argument for “design”
isn’t even very sophisticated, and can be refuted with only an
elementary knowledge of evolution.
I’ll leave it to the readers to educate each other on this one—it’s
an exercise in using what you’ve learned about how evolution works to
address creationist distortions . Do post below the reason why Nelson’s
argument is fatally flawed. And watch the movie first. It’s a slick
production, full of sophistry.
