Intelligent Design Proponent Says God Must Be Stupid

Our friends over at the "Discovery Institute" (a misnomer if ever there was one) have in essence told us that God is just plain stupid. What's even funnier is that their boneheaded leader, Dr. Cornelius Hunter, doesn't even seem to realize what a gaffe he just pulled.

We do not know evolution to be an obvious, compelling explanation of the data—beyond any shadow of a doubt. Yet this is precisely what evolutionists claim. ... Here, for example, is what one professor recently wrote to me:

"An omnipotent god could do anything (we guess), but one who is omnipotent, serious, and thoughtful (at least as serious and thoughtful as an exemplary human) would not route wiring from giraffe’s larynx around its aorta."

How does the professor know that an omnipotent, serious, and thoughtful god would not route wiring from the giraffe’s larynx around its aorta? What does the professor know about omnipotent, serious, and thoughtful gods? And what does the professor know about creating giraffes? Precious little, I’m afraid, in both cases."

Wrong, wrong, wrong!

OK, Dr. Hunter, let me explain it in plain simple terms.

Creationists are "Surprised" That Convergent Evolution Works

I try to avoid commenting on anything from the "Discovery Institute" because any response lends legitimacy to their creationist drivel. But their latest attack on science is a subtle trick that once again relies on the ignorance of their readership.

Recently, scientists Christin, Weinreich (Brown University) and Besnard (Imperial College) discovered a fascinating side effect of evolution. Scientists have long known about something called convergent evolution, where species that evolve independently in different parts of the world end up looking remarkably similar. The tasmanian wolf (or thylacine, right) is a classic textbook case: it has remarkable similarities to North American and Eurasian wolves, yet it's actually a marsupial, related to the kangaroos.

The cause of convergent evolution is simple: a solution that works in one part of the world works everywhere. The traits that make wolves a successful predator in America also work for the thylacine in Australia.

Did you ever wonder why horses, cattle and antelopes and sparrows have eyes on the sides of their heads, while dogs, cats, owls and humans have eyes in the front? Simple: dogs, cats, owls and humans are predators, and they hunt horses, cattle, antelopes and sparrows. The prey animals need to have a 360-degree view because danger can be anywhere, while the predators need to see only the prey, and see it well. The stereoscopic front-facing eyes of predators converged (came about independently), as did the widely-spaced, 360-degree-view eyes of prey species.

Convergent evolution is a remarkable but well-understood part of the Theory of Evolution. But Christin et al reported on a remarkable evolutionary parallel that happens at the molecular level: in many cases the phenotype's convergent evolution (the eyes, teeth, organs or metabolic features that we can see) are accompanied by genetic convergent evolution. That is, the very same genes and gene sequences that control something in one species are found to control the same thing in another species!

That was quite surprising ... scientists had always assumed that when traits evolved separately and in complete isolation, there would be no genetic similarity. Yet there it was.

And that's where the trouble began. The Discovery Institute creationists seized on the word "surprising" in the scientists' article and started waving it around,