Is ID scientific ? Yet another approach to the question.

Correction: not all engineers are scientists. Some are. There are materials scientists (PhDs) working at understanding the behavior of materials, and biological scientists (PhDs) that are working at making {biological\integrated\autonomic} prosthetics and the like. They may not be experts in the field of biological evolution, but that doesn't make them non-scientific.I would say that science is the art of understanding the universe and engineering is the art of understanding and using science. In every field you will have people with "journeymen mentalities" -- they learn by rote and have little inventiveness to work in new ways of thinking. I know a PhD Biologist like this. Remember that the pre-med that graduates at the bottom of his class is still called "Doctor" ... Engineers may appear to be more drawn to ID than people in other fields, perhaps, because they are less likely to be fundamentalist christians. Same thinking\logic, less unexplainable myth.All the engineers that I personally know are NOT proponents of ID, and several are outright critics because they do know what {real design} looks like.

---

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand RebelAAmerican.Zen[Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.

In my experience, people of many disciplines, and especially engineers, are vocal critics of any form of ID.A good designer knows what real design looks like, and how the real design process operates. We do not see these aspects in any of the ID concepts.Real design brings together knowledge of how systems work with creative solution to problems and empirical solutions where theory fails to provide sufficient information. Real design combines features that {succeed\work better} into new designs so that the total package is an improvement in function and efficiency from the previous one.Look at the design of a space rocket, and trace the different aspects back to their roots and you will see a branching in ideas as you go back in time, where the engine came from, where the life support systems came from, where the electronic controls came from, and the "evolution" of those components will show the same branching back in time combined with bigger and more awkward systems.You do NOT see 1000 different kinds of rocket that are all traceable back only to a barely powered cloth winged aerodynamically unstable creaky contraption in North Carolina, that itself combined ideas that came from bycycles, gas engines, and gliders.The Design Tree is opposite of the Evolutionary Tree, it converges on a design from a lot of false starts and each failure narrows the field of possible solutions. There is also cross-fertilization of ideas from other {fields\solutions} where something that works someplace else is incorporated.You do NOT see a single example of a {design feature} used in one organism being transported to another organism because it is better than the system that organism uses.You do see SAAB coming out with a rear window wiper on their station wagon, and then the following year the SAME FEATURE on other brands.Real design is goal oriented. There is no evidence of {a goal} in the diversity of biological systems other than to survive and to reproduce. No species is any more significant biologically than any other. What's the goal?If real design is involved then why is the human eye such a bad {system\arrangement}, and why does it need mechanical assistance (glasses) to function for most people?Jokes, on the other hand, evolve as people adapt them to new situations or just don't remember them that well.It seems to me that the evidence of design, if you accept a designer in your philosophy, Yorick, is the jokester, loki, raven, pan -- the trickster of so many myths and beliefs.There is better evidence for Silly Design than anything that could be called intelligent.http://EvC Forum: Silly Design Institute: Let's discuss BOTH sides of the Design Controversy...Enjoy.

---

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand RebelAAmerican.Zen[Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.