Epigenetics Buzzword

The DNA code, discovered during the lifetimes of millions of people alive today, provides instructions for simple atoms and molecules of matter to form and assemble themselves into many thousands of proteins. In our early grades, we learned that proteins are the building blocks of life. As young people we neither understood how proteins were assembled from atoms and molecules nor did we understand the process of thousands of proteins assembling themselves into life forms. We took the statement “proteins are the building blocks of life” on simple, child-like faith. But the statement was true!

DNA is the first term in a famous fundamental biological principle: DNA —> RNA —> Protein. DNA, therefore, is the key factor in understanding proteins as the building blocks of life. Most articles on DNA propose that proteins carry the genetic instructions for organisms to develop, grow, function, and reproduce. In the sense that enzymes and hormones are also considered proteins, this statement is true. In the past several decades, a new term has entered our lexicon—epigenetics. This involves heritable changes in gene function that do not involve changes in the DNA sequence. Epigenetics, therefore, takes us far beyond the reality that proteins are the “building blocks of life.” This statement helps us envision the example of physical building blocks at a construction site ready to be assembled into a finished building.

As we contemplate the elements of reproduction, growth, development, and function of a living human (or even any living creature), we realize our life science instruction in early grades or even in high school barely scratched the surface of knowledge of life processes we are gaining today. “Proteins are the building blocks of life” was true but not deeply explanatory. The molecular structure of DNA was revealed in 1953. The genetic code contained in DNA was announced in 1966. Our knowledge of molecular life processes has expanded and continues to expand dramatically.

Among laypersons epigenetics may not be a familiar concept. In terms of the formation of multiple thousands of proteins functioning as building blocks of the body, we have also recently gained knowledge of how hundreds of bodily actions are initiated, controlled, and directed. Epigenetic processes are initiated primarily by DNA methylation, the addition of a methyl (CH3) molecular group to the cytosine base in the DNA molecule. Histone modification is also a process of methylation. At the risk of being frivolous, we might overcome our fear of this chemically technical explanation by a kitchen analogy: A skillful kitchen chef blends just the right quantities of ingredients to his gourmet dishes and prepares them in precisely the correct way and at the proper time.

There are many favorable outcomes of naturally occurring DNA methylation. It has an important role in early embryonic development. Well-publicized phenomena are gene regulation and gene expression—appropriately fixing genes in the “on” or “off” position. Proper cellular differentiation is of greatest importance. Remember that embryonic stem cells are pluripotent, capable of developing into any type of cell. Beneficial heritable gene expression does not depend on the genetic nucleotide sequence. In our previous post (2/21/18), the title “Life’s Developmental Miracle” seems an appropriate descriptor of the processes we describe. 

Without appropriate DNA methylation humans and animals may not manifest their familiar desirable phenotypes—observable physical characteristics. Even though DNA’s genetic coding provides thousands of protein building blocks for life forms, epigenetics tells us that building blocks must be properly assembled using the right tools in the correct way and at the correct time. Understanding the topic of epigenetics is not without challenge. Abnormal methylation is known to cause adverse effects. For example, diseases such as cancer and cardiovascular conditions are worrisome and tragic. Epigenetic processes either benefit or harm living things and may occur either naturally or by the deliberate actions of humans. They are a double-edged sword. Some harmful effects are drugs, pesticides, excessive use of alcohol, tobacco, stress, or even starvation. These cause deleterious effects to the present generation and are sometimes inherited by several generations to follow. With modern medical discoveries also comes the hopeful prospect of medical remediation. 

Scripture passages such as Exodus 20:5, Exodus 34:6-7, Numbers 14:18, and Deuteronomy 5:8-10 could be relevant given our modern understanding of epigenetics. In addition to the theological concept of man’s inherited spiritual deficiency we may better understand the nature of inherited physical illness and frailty. These passages have seemed somewhat troubling but in the light of modern epigenetic knowledge we may gain insight. The statement that God “punishes the children for the sin of the fathers to the third and fourth generation” is a difficult concept. On the other hand, Scripture is filled with many exhortations for righteous living and healthy lifestyles.

The principle of life’s supernatural design is affirmed as humanity has uncovered secrets of the incredibly complex and beautiful DNA code for the production of protein building blocks of living things. To this genetic knowledge we have now added the wonders of epigenetics. Both genetic and epigenetic processes are heritable. They are divine gifts from our Creator, the author of life.     

Life's Developmental Miracle

Miracle: A highly improbable or extraordinary event, development, or accomplishment that brings very welcome consequences. The foregoing definition of “miracle” modifies what many people traditionally believed about the term. A traditional definition of miraculous relates to events that are “not explicable by natural or scientific laws.” Immediate physical healing or raising from the dead would be in this category. Such works were typical of many of the works of Christ during his ministry. In our day most would locate the term miracle on a wide definitional spectrum ranging from unusual to extraordinary to clearly supernatural. Based on this inclusive standard, we assign human reproduction to the status of the miraculous.

Recently our family was blessed with the arrival of a sixth grandchild—our fourth grandson. During the past century our understanding of physical events giving rise to production of a new human life have multiplied exponentially. Our knowledge of prenatal events has been transformed from the general to the specific. We now know what is going on at the level of cellular development, differentiation, and regulation. We formerly knew that the infant's body developed. Now we know what sort of miracle this development entails. 

When we first visited our newest grandson after his birth in the hospital, we were overcome with wonder at the beauty of his perfect fingers, toes, other body parts, and overall resemblance to his brothers and sister. At this level, we marveled  appropriately in devotional thankfulness and wonder. When we dig deeper into developmental and regulatory details during the previous nine months, however, we have apt reason to proclaim his formation and existence a “miracle.” Truth be told, we might be more fascinated by details of developmental events during the formation of a new human being inside the womb than sudden transcendent miracle events. In both cases, the power of the Creator is wonderfully manifest.

The story begins with the joining of two monoploid cells called gametes, the male sperm and the female ovum, into one diploid cell known as a zygote which contains all the genetic information necessary to form a new individual. If the latter statement is true, we may see more clearly the rationale behind our opposition to abortion, the tragic destruction of a human life. The issue of abortion, therefore, places a different perspective on “a woman’s right to ‘choose’” if that choice entails the destruction of a human life.  

The development of the living zygote, a one celled particle formed by the union of gametes from a male and a female human being, is appropriately termed a miracle—“a highly improbable or extraordinary event, development, or accomplishment that brings very welcome consequences.” Anyone who has experienced the birth of their own children or grandchildren, or the birth of children of friends or relatives, may vouch for the appropriateness of the superlative adjective “extraordinary.”

Prenatal human development is aptly described as a miracle. The sequence of events is breathtakingly rapid and eventful. The first two weeks comprise the germinal stage. The zygote divides into two, then four, eight, and sixteen cells. At this early stage differentiation of cell types begins. The cell mass soon forms a blastocyst with a small cavity and travels toward the uterus where tissues of the placenta form. The blastocyst arrives at the uterus about five days after fertilization and is implanted in the endometrial cells of the uterus 8-10 days after ovulation. At 12 days the cells of the ectoderm, mesoderm, and endoderm have begun to differentiate. Cells of the mesoderm are functionally distinct from other cell layers of the embryo. Mesoderm cells initiate the synthesis of gene products crucial for formation of many additional differentiated cells as gestation continues during the nine months of pregnancy. From the stem cells of the embryo, 200 different cell types ultimately develop and position themselves at the correct place and time. This may be the ultimate reproductive miracle. A baby has two trillion cells at birth.

As readers study the period of gestation, the time interval from conception to birth, they will certainly encounter an unfamiliar but vitally important term—Gastrulation— the early organization of the blastocyst into its three-layered cell structure. This process ultimately enables the developing body to produce healthy individual organs. This is termed organogenesis. It is a key concept in bioscience. An oft-quoted pronouncement by Lewis Wolpert, pioneering developmental biologist, notes, “It is not birth, marriage, or death but gastrulation which is truly the most important time in your life.” Wolpert’s statement about this event occurring in the first two weeks of human life relates to respect for the miracle of early prenatal development.

When we read the Psalmist’s description of his body being “knit together in my mother’s womb,” we acquire a profound appreciation for the process and wonders of reproduction. Our cursory study of the germinal stage of pregnancy does not even begin to uncover the depth of detail and beauty of earliest prenatal events, not to mention the sequence of events in the months to follow. It is our hope that readers will reinforce their mission to respect, honor, and preserve human life at this stage. The God of Creation is the Author of Life in many dimensions. We honor the Creator and the miracle of life He has authored.  

      

      

        

Inspirational Eclipses

When public media assign extra hyperbole to celestial events that already possess appeal and fascination, science educators are grateful. Extensive publicity was given to the last two total eclipse events in the last six months. These were unusual closely spaced natural events, worthy of heightened popular interest, attention and explanation. Since summer 2017, Earth residents have experienced two different noteworthy total eclipses—a total solar eclipse visible across the wide areas of the US “lower 48” followed by a total lunar eclipse observable in a majority of the fifty US states. Each event was distinctive in many ways.

To fully enjoy the total solar eclipse careful travel and observational preparations were necessary. The total eclipse was visible in a narrow band only 70 miles wide racing across 14 of the lower 48 US states at a speed of 1691 mph. Estimates of how many people across the US viewed the spectacular totality in person range as high as 20 million. Twelve million residents live in the 70 mile strip. Not all of them observed the event, but several million traveled to the path of totality from a distance.

Observing a total solar eclipse in person is one of the most inspirational natural events imaginable. The occurrence of visible solar totality at any one spot on Earth is incredibly rare. Any single earth location may not be in the narrow path of totality for hundreds of years, perhaps once in 325 years according to one computer analysis. We link our personal account:

http://jasscience.blogspot.com/2017/08/eclipse-everest-experience.html

In contrast, total lunar eclipses occur roughly once per year—85 times in the 21st century. However, lunar totality might occur during daylight and not be visible except for residents on the night side of our planet. Nevertheless, every 1-3 years the events of a total lunar eclipse may be experienced by residents of half of our planetary globe, barring cloudy conditions. According to my memory, I have observed as many as 15-20 total lunar eclipses during my lifetime. Millions of fellow Earth residents have watched our lunar companion passing into the umbral (total) shadow of earth at least several times during their lifetime. The reason: Earth is a large body casting a very large shadow into space; the Moon is a small body which periodically slips into Earth’s umbra, the planet’s dark shadow. Observers experience a wondrous sense of our location in the celestial scheme!

The eclipse of January 31, 2018 was the only lunar event to qualify as a super blue blood moon eclipse from 1866-2037. Even though this characterization was accurate, observers of that eclipse event may not have noted much difference from other lunar eclipses they had experienced. The so-called “super moon” visually appears slightly larger than ordinary moons throughout the year. Slightly larger moons appear several times per year when the moon swings somewhat closer to Earth in its 27.3 day orbit. Super moons sometimes correspond with total lunar eclipses. Blue moons are not descriptive of the moon’s appearance. Rather, they merely signal a moon phase that occurs as the second full moon in a calendar month—unusual, but not different in a visual sense. And finally, blood moons are descriptive of the dim, subdued color acquired by the moon during total lunar eclipses. Every total lunar eclipse is a blood moon.

Residents of Hawaii and Alaska were able to observe the complete super blue blood moon total lunar eclipse of January 31, 2018, including the hours before and after totality when the satellite was passing into and out of the penumbra, 5 hours 17 minutes to be precise. Residents of Europe were unable to view any part of the lunar eclipse. At the same time Northwest Illinois was experiencing a setting totally eclipsed moon, west coast US California residents observed the moon about two hours before setting. Hawaii and Alaska residents observed the eclipsed moon high in their dark night sky, evidence that we abide on a spherical planet. If they were interested in more esoteric eclipse astronomy, they also experienced the moon passing into the penumbra (partial shadow). One source stated the full Moon passing through the penumbra begins to look a little “dusky” as it approaches Earth’s umbra. This is a subtle phenomenon. When the Moon slowly enters the dark umbral shadow, however, a startling change takes place. There is nothing subtle about it.

Our home planet, our lunar satellite, and our Sun provide a breathtaking celestial system. The last two total eclipses, one solar, one lunar, have highlighted three astronomical players on the stage of Solar System wonders. We close our post with two lines from a 2008 worship chorus, “God you reign” by Lincoln Brewster:

“The skies proclaim, God, you reign.”

“Creation sings, God, you reign.”      

         

         

      

Super Blue Blood Moon Eclipse

The total lunar eclipse on January 31 merited many superlatives from media reporters. After all, no total eclipse had coincided with a blue moon for 152 years and a repeat coincidence will not occur again until 2037. The occurrence appropriately acquired the moniker “super blue blood moon” total lunar eclipse. Our current post provides additional clarity for the actual lunar eclipse event as it unfolded on January 31, 2018 as well as an explanation of its adjective-laden label. 

Let’s dissect the terms super, blue, and blood moons that modify lunar eclipses. (A) Supermoons occur fairly often whether or not an eclipse occurs. Supermoons at FULL phase occur in consecutive order about three times per year. One of the three is sometimes dubbed an “extra close” supermoon because it comes within 357,000 km (about 222,000 miles) of Earth. Supermoons appear somewhat larger in the sky—having as much as 30% more sky area—because they come closer to the Earth in the Moon’s elliptical orbit. In addition, larger than normal NEW moons occur about three times per year because of Earth’s variable elliptical orbit. They are also called supermoons, but non-illuminated new moons are not visible in the sky owing to their proximity to the sun. The term “supermoon” has acquired a certain mystique, but actual supermoons are not very unusual. 

(B) Blue moons acquired their romantic name merely by being the second full moon in a calendar month. Full moons take place about 29.5 days apart, so two full moons in any single month could only occur on days 1 and 30, 1 and 31, or 2 and 31 of any month. Blue moons occur about once every 2.7 years. Only 85 total lunar eclipses occur in the 21st century. It is easy to understand that it would be highly unusual for a total lunar eclipse to take place exactly on a day numbered 30 or 31 on which a full moon also occurs. This would be a calendar-related coincidence. The expression “Once in a blue moon” indicates a highly unusual or rare event. 

(C) Finally, we explain the meaning of “blood” moon. This term is perhaps easiest to explain. During total lunar eclipses a little filtered light from the sun is bent around the earth through its atmosphere and falls upon the moon even though no direct sunlight reaches the moon. The filtered light is reddish in color. Thus, the term “blood moon” has become popular. The reddish glow is much dimmer than normal reflected moonlight, but is still beautifully visible during eclipse events. “Blood moon” is a term widely used for a total lunar eclipse, but it has acquired a mysterious meaning in some quarters.

On the early pre-dawn morning of Wednesday, January 31 my sunroom became the observational venue to watch the progress of the Super Blue Blood Moon Eclipse of 2018 and to write the first few sentences of this post. I noted the progress of the umbra, the total shadow of our home planet, slowly crossing the moon. The visual event began at 5:48 AM with a tiny cookie bite of darkness at one edge. By 6:51 AM totality had begun. I was blessed that the sky during this stage of the eclipse was reasonably clear. Two factors prevented me from seeing the totally eclipsed moon’s blood red color beginning at 6:51 AM. The sky was just beginning to become light in the pre-dawn morning and it had acquired a haze of thin clouds.  

Watching the total shadow of Earth’s umbra slowly creep across the Moon’s surface inspires deep emotions. Humanity inhabits a planet which occasionally casts its eclipsing shadow on the Moon, Earth’s satellite a quarter million miles distant. One may directly perceive that Earth is a much larger body than our lunar companion as we watch the gentle curve of the shadow’s edge slowly creep across its surface. A palpable feeling of wonder, reverence and humility before our Creator grips the thoughtful, contemplative observer. We experience a unique sense of our location in the Solar System and the cosmos.            

  

Intelligent Mind at Work

During extended discussions concerning life origins with friends, exchanges have often revolved around evolution as a natural process. According to theory, evolution occurs as a mysterious undirected force propelling the appearance of the wondrous multiplicity of life, its astonishing processes, and its magnificence. Whereas random mutation and natural selection formerly held sway in explaining evolutionary processes, James A. Shapiro, University of Chicago microbiologist, is the forefront scientist advocating The Third Way of Evolution, a new movement opposed to Neo-Darwinism. Their website lists many scientists who are either co-founders of the project launched in 2014, or in sympathy with tenets of the innovative “third way” hypothesis. The proposals of the third way group present a serious challenge to the traditional random mutation and natural selection paradigm which has held sway among evolutionists for many years since the time of Darwin. But neither Neo-Darwinists nor proponents of the third way countenance a supernatural Intelligent Mind responsible for the existence of life or its processes.

According to believers in naturalism, only natural laws explain the physical makeup and operation of our world—a supernatural Creator had no role in designing or creating the features of our physical existence. Naturalism and materialism are sometimes conflated. Naturalistic evolution is an unguided process. According to naturalism, an intelligent mind did not guide the process of the creation of life or how life has changed. Neo-Darwinists and third way proponents both believe in unguided evolution.

Naturalism has acquired a very precise meaning. Early 20th century naturalists, according to the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, “…urged that reality is exhausted by nature, containing nothing ‘supernatural’ and that the scientific method should be used to investigate all areas of reality, including the ‘human spirit.’” The Third Way website states, “Many scientists today see the need for a deeper and more complete exploration of the evolutionary process.” Rapid evolutionary processes of The Third Way are characterized by symbiogenesis, horizontal DNA transfer, action of mobile DNA, and epigenetic modification, they state.

Creationists of every stripe and most advocates of Intelligent Design believe God performed miraculous acts beyond ordinary natural events during earth’s history of life. These supernatural acts, according to them, produced the DNA molecule with its complex coding capable of generating countless thousands of different appropriately folded proteins. Multiple cell types composing each individual organism require specific proteins. Various organs require certain cell types to produce appropriate body tissues. Final body plans require specialized arrangements of tissues and organs in order to produce the finished total body plan. Epigenetic modification is the “supervising force” insuring that the living materials are correctly assembled during gestation—the period between conception and birth.

To use a builders analogy for epigenetic modification, building foremen insure that the raw building materials are assembled in a timely fashion and integrated properly. The genetic parallel in our simplified analogy relates to the initial production and acquisition of the proper building materials. When a human baby dwells nine months in the womb, we may focus on (a) the genetic knowledge that DNA has supplied the code for the production of many thousands of “just right” protein building materials, and also (b) the epigenetic knowledge that the proteins were assembled for proper form and function. Broadly, we are speaking about developmental biology which focuses more intently on epigenetic inheritance than genetic inheritance. Both types of inheritance affect an individual’s phenotype (physical and behavioral characteristics).

Where the naturalistic verdict of science concerning origin of life leaves us unsatisfied, perhaps our subjective intuition takes over. Theistic creationists find it inconceivable that living things could have come into existence or developed their startling innovations naturalistically. For starters, creationists are incredulous that inanimate matter could have self-assembled, becoming complex molecular DNA without a working, intelligent mind directing the process. Secular naturalism’s explanations seem woefully inadequate to explain the wonders of Earth’s magnificent multiplicity of functional life—humanity being the crowning pinnacle.

Humanity is gifted with ability to identify evidence of intelligence. The products of intelligence surround us everywhere we look. There is little or no disagreement except perhaps as an ontological or philosophical challenge. Not only is humanity gifted with ability to detect external evidence of intelligence, but also the presence of our own personal intelligence. By our intrinsic intelligence, we are able to identify the work of an Intelligent Creator.

Intelligence is not a concept defined in Scripture. On the other hand, related concepts of mind, knowledge, and wisdom are often referenced in Scripture. The first use of the term intelligence occurred in the 14th century. Various definitions of intelligence involve ability to know, learn, and comprehend general truths together with ability to reason and possess superior understanding. Creativity is often an outcome of intelligence. Let us be thankful for our personal intelligence, for intelligence in others, for our ability to identify intelligence, and for the existence of the ultimate Intelligent Agent—the omnipotent Creator of All Things.   

    

Farewell to Mutation and Natural Selection

The paradigm of evolution is still relentlessly promoted in our culture. Its link to mutation and natural selection, however, is weakening. Quoting a term popularized by science philosopher Thomas Kuhn’s (1922-1996) words, major structures of scientific belief sometimes experience “paradigm shifts.” Evolution’s previous support structure, mutation and natural selection, is undergoing an uneasy paradigm shift. Mutation and natural selection as drivers of evolution have fallen on difficult times. Other causes and effects of evolution such as genetic drift, gene flow, and epigenetics are rising to prominence.

In our post of 1/11/18 we dealt with Perry Marshall’s proposal that cells themselves are agents of intelligence—that cells are “smart.” Marshall has proposed these ideas widely since the middle of the last decade. He posits that mutation and natural selection until recently had provided the support framework for the paradigm of evolution, but is now superseded by a more viable evolutionary support structure he describes as a “third way,” beyond both Neo-darwinism and Stephen C. Meyer’s detailed Intelligent Design theory. Marshall describes the “third way” in his Evolution 2.0, the title of his 2015 book.

Marshall cites several startling experiments he touts as rapid evolution. For example, from his Evolution 2.0 volume: “Research at the University of Colorado reports a fascinating discovery about protozoa…..Starving male and female protozoans mate (pooling their poverty, apparently) and then completely restructure the genome to make a new nucleus, cutting DNA into 100,000 pieces, then splicing and rearranging the code. In other words, a protozoan reprograms its own DNA through a repeating, programmed response to stress—through thousands of simultaneous edits.” These changes occur in a matter of hours.

The protozoa are then adapted to their new environment. As we studied Marshall’s writings on this subject and watched his YouTube exchanges, we were not clear whether he believes a new species was created and whether his innovative “third way” could qualify as full-fledged “evolution” in the classic sense.

We point out that these changes took place in prokaryotes, simple one-celled animals, not in complex, higher order multi-celled animals. Marshall implies that the phenomenon may be related to the reason we should take all of our prescribed antibiotics when we have infections because germs rapidly evolve.

Some epigenetic changes related to variability in the environment have been shown to become hard-wired into a species’ genetics temporarily or even permanently. The well-known phrase, “It’s in the DNA,” while true in terms of protein building blocks producing our physical form, does not tell the whole story of epigenetic inheritance. It is an exciting area of novel research.  

Stephen C. Meyer promotes intelligent design as his paradigm. This means the intelligent designer is the author of the functional genetic code. DNA is a code for producing proteins comprising the physical building blocks of life. This includes mysterious protein folding processes. Many envision the genetic DNA code as the product of an intelligent mind. Meyer implies that an intelligent mind is the creator of life itself. Moreover, startling historical events such as the the Cambrian Explosion of diverse Earth life are the product of sudden and rapid infusions of new information along the timeline of Earth history according to Meyer. The origin of “first life” is an intractable problem in the field of secular science because those scientists are searching for a natural explanation, not a supernatural explanation. Perry Marshall cautiously concedes that the first appearance of life on our planet may be in a different league than his described “third way” of evolution. 

Marshall assigns intelligence to cells rather than an Intelligent Designer who provides new information and acts periodically to produce sudden new appearances of novel species. He terms this process “cellular genetic evolution.” Essentially, Marshall believes the ability to develop new informational codes was programmed into cells from the beginning. The intelligent designer is the cell itself. Marshall offers a multi-million dollar prize to anyone who explains how to identify a naturally occurring code: How do we get from chemicals to code? And how do we get a code without designing one?

These questions have different answers along the spectrum of beliefs in (a) naturalistic evolution, (b) theistic evolution (evolutionary creationism), (c) intelligent design, (d) young earth creationism, and (e) old earth creationism. There are numerous variations of these beliefs. We pose the idea that those who espouse one of these beliefs (or any variant of these beliefs) must show respectful deference to those who may disagree. At the same time, all must commit to a search for truth.

One phenomenon related to these discussions relates to the interface of science and theology. Sometimes Christians become ambivalent when stating their respect for science versus their reverence for theological verities. Science separates itself from investigating or commenting upon supernatural causes, but this separation did not always apply when the scientific revolution first emerged. Creationism and Intelligent Design theory are not compatible with evolutionary theory.

Th Bible is not a scientific textbook. Many scripture passages, however, observe the natural world through both theological and scientific lenses. Isaiah 45:18 comments on the creation of living things inhabiting our planet: “He who fashioned and made the earth, he founded it; he did not create it to be empty, but formed it to be inhabited—he says: I am the Lord, and there is no other.” Psalm 139:13-15, an unequalled pro-life passage, exults: “For you created my inmost being; you knit me together in my mother’s womb. I praise you because I am fearfully and wonderfully made; your works are wonderful, I know that full well. My frame was not hidden from you when I was made in the secret place. When I was woven together in the depths of the earth, your eyes saw my unformed body. All the days ordained for me were written in your book before one of them came to be.” (NIV)

  

    

     

   

Identity of Intelligence

In our last post we dealt with the positions of two famous commentators concerning the origin of living things—Stephen C. Meyer and Perry Marshall. For Christians, believing the God of Creation acted in an intelligent manner to design the physical universe, and more particularly, the living humanity which inhabits our planet seems like a “given.”

Stephen C. Meyer directs the Discovery Institute, a well known organization promoting the paradigm of Intelligent Design, a concept which has been in mainstream discussion for several decades. The general idea that God created the universe and and its physical processes has been present in Christianity, Judaism, and other major religions for several thousand years. In order to remind readers of the tenets of the ID paradigm, we quote one of the defining statements of the Discovery Institute: “Intelligent Design refers to a scientific research program, as well as a community of scientists, philosophers, and other scholars who seek evidence of design in nature. The theory of Intelligent Design holds that certain features of the universe are best explained by an intelligent cause, not an undirected process such as natural selection…”

Intelligent Design, according to the Discovery Institute, is opposed to the position of most secular scientists in our day who claim that science investigates only natural cause and effect in our cosmic environment. Intelligent Design leaders present ID as a “scientific research program.” Most of the scientific community has denied that ID is scientific and takes pains to paint ID with the brush of pseudoscience. This claim is energetically made, along with the claim that all scientists investigating the natural world must use the investigating strategy of MN—methodological naturalism—wherein intelligent causes either do not exist or may not even be considered as an explanatory possibility. Scientists respond to objections of theists by claiming that MN is used only as a heuristic tool. That is to say, MN is only used only for the purpose of learning something in our investigation process.

If life originated and historically changed due to an intelligent cause we inquire, “What is the identity of that intelligence?” Is the intelligent Judeo-Christian God the source and originator of life and its changes on our planet? Is there, perhaps, an extraterrestrial source explained by the theory of panspermia? Or is intelligence an intrinsic universal characteristic of our universe which extends to Planet Earth? Ideologically, there are substantial differences in these views. Those who believe in Intelligent Design to explain life on Earth are accused of promoting a religious rather than a scientific position. Most ID proponents would agree that ID is both scientific and has clearly religious implications. ID proponents have attempted to demonstrate that the theory is supported by many scientific principles such as the principles of cause and effect. The science community elects to enter the origins discussion at the level of natural effect, loudly claiming that assigning cause to a supernatural Creator is a religious concept. They propose various other natural causes instead.

The Intelligent Design movement avoids explicitly naming God as the Intelligent Designer, possibly to avoid the accusation it is merely creationism in disguise and to preserve the credibility of ID as a valid scientific theory. Stephen C. Meyer, in his most recent major tome, Darwin’s Doubt, (2013) shares his deeper personal thoughts: “The ability to detect design makes belief in an intelligent designer (or a creator, or God) not only tenet of faith, but something to which the evidence of nature now bears witness. In short, it brings science and faith into real harmony.” In Meyer’s earlier classic, Signature in the Cell, (2009), he states, “I personally think that the evidence of design in biology, considered in the context of other evidence, strengthens the case for theism and, thus, my personal belief in God. Subjectively, as a Christian theist, I find this implication of intelligent design ‘intellectually satisfying.’” These sentiments are secondary, however, to Meyer’s primary campaign to present the ID concept as science.

The hesitance of some evolutionary creationists and some old earth creationists to link themselves to the paradigm of Intelligent Design is somewhat difficult to explain. Personally, I know many fine Christians who avoid the label for various reasons. Meanwhile, the scientific proposals of Meyer in the two classic works mentioned above, totaling nearly 1000 pages, are red meat for those with both a theistic worldview and a scientific mind. We heartily recommend these books.

Stephen C. Meyer is primarily concerned with the reality of intelligent design in living things as manifest in the majesty of genetics. In contrast, Perry Marshall makes the case for cells themselves as intelligent entities owing to the wonders of epigenetics.  In a future post we investigate whether these contrasts conflict with a theistic world view.

If you are interested in our previous, detailed discussion of ID, you may want to check out this link:

http://jasscience.blogspot.com/2014/10/restrictive-science.html