I was recently reading an article providing evidence against Intelligent Design (ID), which called into question a seemingly well researched and intelligent ID supporter, Michael Behe. He claimed that blood clotting was an irreducible system, a claim that science could not at the time of its statement refute. However, apparently in response to these claims, extensive scientific research has been done.
The work of evolutionary biologist Russell Doolittle showed almost exactly what the scientific community expected; That clotting IS infact a recucible system with jawless fish like lampreys, often considered to be living evolutionary relics, lacking several clotting components. It should be noted that humans lacking these components suffer from hemophilia.
One might immediately turn to Michael Behe and yell victoriously, "In your face! Science and evolution win again!". This was my immediate reaction, but after a moment I considered an interesting thought. Is it not in the nature of science to question? Should we really view this as a "battle between ID and evolution"?
Consider that perhaps without skeptics like Michael Behe the research on clotting systems in fish and whales might never have been done. Because of him, science is strengthened, not weakened. And while I am sure he will immediately seach for another unexplored topic to claim is irreducible, why not encourage him? Carefully considering the weakest points of a theory will either strengthen it or reveal a flaw, either way science is the winner.
Let me conclude with a final thought. While this particular ID supporter presented an educated argument, many ID arguments are much less organized or useful. ID, in and of itself lacks any concrete proof of its existance. ID supporters, however, are adamant about the falsity of evolutionary theory. It is this position that is useful, as science is inherently questioning. Thus by railing against evolution, they themselves become part of the furthering of science by being its critical editors.
So to ID supporters out there: Don't just support blindly. Do your homework. Find flaws in evolutionary theory. Break it until it screams for mercy. But for everyone's sake, please do so in a scholarly way.
