There’s not much to add in terms of rebutting intelligent design creationist Jonathan Wells’ latest misappropriation of science that Larry Moran, Orac, and Ian Musgrave didn’t already write. But Wells’ latest screed demonstrates just how pathetically low intelligent design creationism has sunk. An argument that stupid is a tacit admission of defeat.
Essentially, Wells’ argument can be summarized as “if evolutionary biology isn’t cited in every single biology paper EVAH!, then evolutionary biology isn’t relevant to biology.” Never mind that every step in genomic biology involves evolutionary biology, that’s really the crux of his argument.
Wells’ strategy can be described in more detail:
- Find a biological structure or phenomenon that’s kinda complex.
- Declare said structure or phenomenon to be possible evidence of irreducible complexity.
- Find papers about this irreducibly complex phenomenon that don’t explicitly mention evolution.
- Proclaim that TEH DARWINISMZ!! is irrelevant to biology.
Wells has now moved the goalposts to a ludicrous point (besides up his own backside): the fact that many researchers use evolutionary concepts (e.g., homology) and evolutionary methods (phylogenetics) isn’t good enough. Now every paper has to discuss the evolutionary implications of the work, or ‘Darwinism’ is dead.
ID creationists are not serious people. Once again, their words have no intrinsic meaning: they are only tools to manipulate, as opposed to engage, other people.