Intelligent Design Icon Intelligent Design

Biologic Institute’s Redesigned Website and Blog Is a Winner


Our friends and co-conspirators at Biologic Institute have done a major website redesign, and it’s a winner. Led by director Douglas Axe and senior research scientist Ann Gauger, Biologic’s scientists investigate the hypothesis that what looks like design in nature really is that. Some of their names you will recognize from ENV, including Jonathan Wells, Richard Sternberg, Guillermo Gonzalez, and of course Dr. Axe and Dr. Gauger.
They’ve now re-envisioned the Biologic homepage as a frequently updated group discussion — one of those “blog” things we keep hearing so much about. It’s also a very handsome design.
Axe and Gauger are off to a lively start with posts on Alfred Russel Wallace, all the differences between humans and chimps not seemingly accounted for by the mere 4 percent genetic difference between us and them, and the wrench that the publication of the gorilla genome has thrown into smooth Darwinian accounts of common descent.
We’ll hope to steal cross-post some of their excellent material from time to time, if we can get away without their noticing it obtain their permission.
By the way, that pretty and striking blob-like object above is featured in an item that Doug Axe posted at Biologic. It is luciferase, the evocatively named enzyme that makes fireflies glow and that also points to one test, among others, that Darwinism fails:

Reasoning in reverse from Darwinism, we infer that it must be easy to get these molecular lanterns by accident because many different versions exist in a wide variety of life forms. But they aren’t nearly as simple as the image suggests. The outer shape may look like a blob, but a highly refined inner structure is needed for that enzyme to hold together and do its job, and the same is true for the other enzymes that make the various luciferins. Reverse reasoning tries to tease out historical details by assuming that the processes in operation have been correctly identified and understood. There’s certainly a place for that in science, but it always has to be checked against forward reasoning, where we test whether we really have identified the right processes. Darwinism seems to have failed this test, but biologists won’t see this until they shift out of reverse.

Go over there and take a look for yourself. But make sure to come back here quickly afterward.