IT KEEPS GETTING BETTER. Check out the latest work of genius from the neo-theocrats at the Discovery Institute’s Center for Science and Culture. The insanity begins with the title: Another Intelligent Design Prediction Fulfilled: Function for a Pseudogene. Right, another prediction fulfilled! The Discoveroids are so far over the edge they don’t have a clue how clueless they are.
Strictly for amusement, we shall dip into the article — but not too much, because the underlying subject is far too technical for the article’s author, Casey Luskin. It isn’t worth the effort to expound on the science involved in order to figure out where Casey goes astray.
Casey thinks he’s writing about “junk” DNA, which Wikipedia defines as “a provisional label for the portions of the DNA sequence of a chromosome or a genome for which no function has yet been identified.” There’s more to it than that, of course. Animals have been bred with huge chunks of junk DNA knocked out, and they seem to be entirely unaffected, so the conclusion that much of junk DNA is useless seems justified. But no one is certain yet, and possible functions for at least some junk DNA are being considered.
Anyway, let’s watch as Casey demonstrates the intellectual bankruptcy of the creationist movement. For example, here’s how he begins:
Darwinists have long made an argument from ignorance …
See what we mean? Consider the incredible irony here. We’ve all seen the creationists argue that unexplained phenomena (their number always shrinks as science advances) are the handiwork of their fantasy Designer. That sums up the entire “science” of Intelligent Design. Knowing that ID is entirely an ignorance-based claim, we were genuinely stunned by Casey’s opening phrase. But let’s continue with Casey’s sentence:
… where our lack of present knowledge of the function for a given biological structure is taken as evidence that there is no function and the structure is merely a vestige of evolutionary history.
Not quite, Casey. But then, you’ve never impressed us with your understanding of anything else, so why should you get this right? Anyway, here’s where it gets really funny:
In contrast, intelligent agents design objects for a purpose, and therefore intelligent design predicts that biological structures will have function.
Ooooooh! A “scientific” prediction! Those “intelligent agents” are all business! They do everything for a purpose. Whoop-de-doo! Then, Casey points out how scientists (not the public-relations hacks at Casey’s creationism outfit) have found that some bit of junk DNA performs a function. You know how it goes from here — Darwinists wrong again! They’re idiots! Creationism wins! End of debate!
Hey, Casey! Unless you can demonstrate that those “intelligent agents” of yours have assigned a function for every single bit of junk DNA, then your ID prediction that everything has a function is going to crash and burn. But wait — Casey has that one covered:
To be sure, there are still pseudogenes for which no function is known, but it will be interesting to watch and see if future research crosses more and more pseudogenes off the list of “junk” DNA.
Right, Casey. Don’t do any research. Just sit there in your Seattle cublicle and declare that all your ID prophesies have been or soon will be fulfilled. Great science, Casey. And while you’re at it, keep sneering at genuine scientists who confidently predict that additional transitional fossils will eventually be found. You creationist types scoff at that kind of experience-based confidence by calling it “faith.” You guys are the greatest!