It boggles the mind to think about how such “codes within codes” could evolve by random mutation and natural selection. But that’s not all.
Occasionally at Discovery Institute we get an e-mail from some disgruntled Darwin advocate or other that taunts us by brandishing the names of luxury science journals.
An otherwise scientifically sound paper might not be cited for reasons that are political, not scientific. In the intelligent-design movement, we’ve seen this many times.
Just as Darwinism cannot explain these laws, the laws themselves cannot explain all the adaptive complexity of life. Structuralism leaves plenty of room for intelligent design.
An e-mail correspondent challenges our list of peer-reviewed pro-ID articles, pointing out that some of the journals are apparently not listed in the Thomson-Reuters Journal Citation Reports.