Design inteligente (Portuguese Wikipedia)

«Science and Policy: Intelligent Design and Peer Review». American Association for the Advancement of Science. 2007. Consultado em 19 de julho de 2007. Arquivado do original em 6 de junho de 2012
See: 1) List of scientific societies rejecting intelligent design 2) Kitzmiller v. Dover page 83. 3) The Discovery Institute's A Scientific Dissent From Darwinism petition begun in 2001 has been signed by "over 700 scientists" as of August 20, 2006. A four day A Scientific Support for Darwinism petition gained 7733 signatories from scientists opposing ID. The AAAS, the largest association of scientists in the U.S., has 120,000 members, and firmly rejects ID. More than 70,000 Australian scientists and educators condemn teaching of intelligent design in school science classes List of statements from scientific professional organizations Arquivado em 28 de março de 2008, no Wayback Machine. on the status intelligent design and other forms of creationism. According to The New York Times "There is no credible scientific challenge to the theory of evolution as an explanation for the complexity and diversity of life on earth". Dean, Cordelia (27 de setembro de 2007). «Scientists Feel Miscast in Film on Life's Origin». The New York Times. Consultado em 28 de setembro de 2007
National Science Teachers Association, a professional association of 55,000 science teachers and administrators in a 2005 press release: "We stand with the nation's leading scientific organizations and scientists, including Dr. John Marburger, the president's top science advisor, in stating that intelligent design is not science. ...It is simply not fair to present pseudoscience to students in the science classroom". National Science Teachers Association Disappointed About Intelligent Design Comments Made by President Bush National Science Teachers Association Press Release August 3, 2005.
• "for most members of the mainstream scientific community, ID is not a scientific theory, but a creationist pseudoscience". Trojan Horse or Legitimate Science: Deconstructing the Debate over Intelligent Design Arquivado em 24 de julho de 2007, no Wayback Machine. David Mu. Harvard Science Review, Volume 19, Issue 1, Fall 2005.
• "Creationists are repackaging their message as the pseudoscience of intelligent design theory". Professional Ethics Report Arquivado em 3 de janeiro de 2011, no Wayback Machine. American Association for the Advancement of Science, 2001.
"for most members of the mainstream scientific community, ID is not a scientific theory, but a creationist pseudoscience". Trojan Horse or Legitimate Science: Deconstructing the Debate over Intelligent Design Arquivado em 24 de julho de 2007, no Wayback Machine., David Mu, Harvard Science Review, Volume 19, Issue 1, Fall 2005.
• "Creationists are repackaging their message as the pseudoscience of intelligent design theory". Professional Ethics Report Arquivado em 3 de janeiro de 2011, no Wayback Machine., American Association for the Advancement of Science, 2001.
• Conclusion of Kitzmiller v. Dover Area School District Ruling
From the world's largest general scientific society:
- «Statement on the Teaching of Evolution» (PDF) (Nota de imprensa). American Association for the Advancement of Science. 16 de fevereiro de 2006

accessmylibrary.com

"If I ever became the president of a university (per impossibile), I would dissolve the biology department and divide the faculty with tenure that I couldn't get rid of into two new departments: those who know engineering and how it applies to biological systems would be assigned to the new "Department of Biological Engineering"; the rest, and that includes the evolutionists, would be consigned to the new "Department of Nature Appreciation" (didn't Darwin think of himself as a naturalist?)". "Truly Programmable Matter", William Dembski, 10 January 2007 published at Uncommon Descent. Downloaded 24 May 2007.
•"Demonstrative charts introduced through Dr. Forrest show parallel arguments relating to the rejection of naturalism, evolution's threat to culture and society, 'abrupt appearance' implying divine creation, the exploitation of the same alleged gaps in the fossil record, the alleged inability of science to explain complex biological information like DNA, as well as the theme that proponents of each version of creationism merely aim to teach a scientific alternative to evolution to show its 'strengths and weaknesses,' and to alert students to a supposed 'controversy' in the scientific community". Kitzmiller v. Dover Area School District, Decision, p. 34 (emphasis added)
•"Additionally, [leading intelligent design advocate] Dembski agrees that science is ruled by methodological naturalism and argues that this rule must be overturned if ID is to prosper". Kitzmiller v. Dover Area School District, Decision, p. 30.
•"Intelligent Design [...] supposes that the origins of living things require supernatural interventions to create the intricate, design-like, living forms that we see all around us". "Natural selection vs. intelligent design" From: USA Today (Magazine) January 1, 2004 Author: Ruse, Michael.

aclu.org

"Q. Has the Discovery Institute been a leader in the intelligent design movement? A. Yes, the Discovery Institute's Center for Science and Culture. Q. And are almost all of the individuals who are involved with the intelligent design movement associated with the Discovery Institute? A. All of the leaders are, yes". Barbara Forrest, 2005, testifying in the Kitzmiller v. Dover Area School District trial. «Kitzmiller v. Dover Area School District Trial transcript: Day 6 (October 5), PM Session, Part 1.». The TalkOrigins Archive. 2005. Consultado em 19 de julho de 2007
• "The Discovery Institute is the ideological and strategic backbone behind the eruption of skirmishes over science in school districts and state capitals across the country". In: Wilgoren, J (21 de agosto de 2005). «Politicized Scholars Put Evolution on the Defensive» (PDF). The New York Times. Consultado em 19 de julho de 2007
• «Who is behind the ID movement?». Frequently Asked Questions About "Intelligent Design". American Civil Liberties Union. 16 de setembro de 2005. Consultado em 20 de julho de 2007
• Kahn, JP (27 de julho de 2005). «The Evolution of George Gilder. The Author And Tech-Sector Guru Has A New Cause To Create Controversy With: Intelligent Design». The Boston Globe. Consultado em 19 de julho de 2007
• «Who's Who of Intelligent Design Proponents». Science & Religion Guide. Science & Theology News. 2005. Consultado em 20 de julho de 2007 (PDF file from Discovery Institute).
• "The engine behind the ID movement is the Discovery Institute". Attie, Alan D.; Elliot Sober, Ronald L. Numbers, Richard M. Amasino, Beth Cox4, Terese Berceau, Thomas Powell and Michael M. Cox (2006). «Defending science education against intelligent design: a call to action». Journal of Clinical Investigation 116:1134–1138. doi:10.1172/JCI28449. A publication of the American Society for Clinical Investigation. Consultado em 20 de julho de 2007

actionbioscience.org

Dembski, William A. (2002). «Detecting Design in the Natural Sciences». Intelligent Design?. Natural History Magazine. Consultado em 18 de julho de 2007

answersingenesis.org

Sheppard, Pam S. (4 de fevereiro de 2006). «Intelligent design: is it intelligent; is it Christian?». Answers in Genesis. Consultado em 21 de julho de 2007
Wieland, Carl (30 de agosto de 2002). «AiG's views on the Intelligent Design Movement». Answers in Genesis. Consultado em 20 de julho de 2007

antievolution.org

Wedge Document Discovery Institute, 1999.
•"[M]embers of the national ID movement insist that their attacks on evolution aren't religiously motivated, but, rather, scientiﬁc in nature. [...] Yet the express strategic objectives of the Discovery Institute; the writings, careers, and affiliations of ID's leading proponents; and the movement's funding sources all betray a clear moral and religious agenda". Inferior Design Chris Mooney. The American Prospect, August 10, 2005.
"The social consequences of materialism have been devastating. As symptoms, those consequences are certainly worth treating. However, we are convinced that in order to defeat materialism, we must cut it off at its source. That source is scientific materialism. This is precisely our strategy. If we view the predominant materialistic science as a giant tree, our strategy is intended to function as a 'wedge' that, while relatively small, can split the trunk when applied at its weakest points. The very beginning of this strategy, the 'thin edge of the wedge,' was Phillip Johnson's critique of Darwinism begun in 1991 in Darwinism on Trial, and continued in Reason in the Balance and Defeating Darwinism by Opening Minds. Michael Behe's highly successful Darwin's Black Box followed Johnson's work. We are building on this momentum, broadening the wedge with a positive scientific alternative to materialistic scientific theories, which has come to be called the theory of intelligent design (ID). Design theory promises to reverse the stifling dominance of the materialist worldview, and to replace it with a science consonant with Christian and theistic convictions". Wedge Document Discovery Institute, 1999. (PDF file)
Wedge Document Discovery Institute, 1999.

apologetics.org

Behe, Michael (1997): Molecular Machines: Experimental Support for the Design Inference [3] Arquivado em 26 de janeiro de 2008, no Wayback Machine.

archive.is

Dembski. 2005. Intelligent Design's Contribution to the Debate Over Evolution: A Reply to Henry Morris.Reply to Henry Morris Arquivado em 2012-07-29 na Archive.today

archive.today

Leading intelligent design proponent William Dembski (2001) argues the opposing view in IS INTELLIGENT DESIGN A FORM OF NATURAL THEOLOGY? Arquivado em 2012-07-29 na Archive.today
Dembski, William A. (2001). «Is Intelligent Design a Form of Natural Theology?». Design Inference Website. Consultado em 19 de julho de 2007. Arquivado do original em 29 de julho de 2012

arn.org

Stephen C. Meyer and Paul A. Nelson, May 1, 1996, CSC – Getting Rid of the Unfair Rules, A book review, Origins & Design, Retrieved 2007-05-20,
• Phillip E. Johnson, August 31, 1996, Starting a Conversation about Evolution, Access Research Network Phillip Johnson Files, Retrieved 2007-05-20,
• Stephen C. Meyer, December 1, 2002, Ignatius Press. The Scientific Status of Intelligent Design: The Methodological Equivalence of Naturalistic and Non-Naturalistic Origins Theories,
• Kitzmiller v. Dover Area School District (2005), Whether ID Is Science,
• Kitzmiller v. Dover Area School District (2005), Lead defense expert Professor Behe admitted that his broadened definition of science, which encompasses ID, would also include astrology.
• See also Evolution of Kansas science standards continues as Darwin's theories regain prominence International Herald Tribune, February 13, 2007, Retrieved 2007-05-20.
Phillip E. Johnson (1999). «The Wedge: Phillip Johnson». Touchstone: A Journal of Mere Christianity. Consultado em 24 de setembro de 2007
"ID fails on three different levels, any one of which is sufficient to preclude a determination that ID is science. They are: (1) ID violates the centuries-old ground rules of science by invoking and permitting supernatural causation; (2) the argument of irreducible complexity, central to ID, employs the same flawed and illogical contrived dualism that doomed creation science in the 1980s; and (3) ID's negative attacks on evolution have been refuted by the scientific community" Kitzmiller v. Dover Area School District (2005), Ruling, page 64 ff
• "Broom shows conclusively that intelligent design's opposition to Darwinism rests primarily on scientific grounds". William Dembski, in the forward of How Blind is the Watchmaker? Nature's Design and the Limits of Naturalistic Science Arquivado em 10 de junho de 2008, no Wayback Machine.. Neil Broom. 2001
Stephen C. Meyer (1986). «We Are Not Alone». Eternity. Access Research Network. Consultado em 10 de outubro de 2007
Some of Dembski's responses to assertions of specified complexity being a tautology can be found at [5]
Phillip Johnson. Touchstone: A Journal of Mere Christianity. July/August 1999."...the first thing that has to be done is to get the Bible out of the discussion. ...This is not to say that the biblical issues are unimportant; the point is rather that the time to address them will be after we have separated materialist prejudice from scientific fact". The Wedge
Phillip E. Johnson (31 de agosto de 1996). «Starting a Conversation about Evolution: Johnson, Phillip». Access Research Network. Consultado em 18 de outubro de 2008. My colleagues and I speak of 'theistic realism'—or sometimes, 'mere creation'—as the defining concept of our [the ID] movement. This means that we affirm that God is objectively real as Creator, and that the reality of God is tangibly recorded in evidence accessible to science, particularly in biology.

au.org

«Intelligent Design: Creationism's Trojan Horse». Americans United for the Separation of Church and State. 2005. Consultado em 29 de julho de 2007

bbc.co.uk

news.bbc.co.uk

«'Design' attack on school science». BBC News. 29 de setembro de 2006. Consultado em 13 de julho de 2007

belfasttelegraph.co.uk

Henry, Lesley-Anne (26 de setembro de 2007). «Tussle of Biblical proportions over creationism in Ulster classrooms - Education - News - Belfast Telegraph». Belfast Telegraph. Consultado em 1 de outubro de 2007
* «Viewpoint: The world, according to Lisburn folk - Opinion - News - Belfast Telegraph». Belfast Telegraph. 27 de setembro de 2007. Consultado em 1 de outubro de 2007

biolsocwash.org

«Statement from the Council of the Biological Society of Washington». Biological Society of Washington. Consultado em 19 de julho de 2007

biomedcentral.com

Del Bem, Luiz EV; Michel GA Vincentz (5 de novembro de 2010). «Evolution of xyloglucan-related genes in green plants». BMC Evolutionary Biology (em inglês). 10 (1). 341 páginas. ISSN 1471-2148. PMID 21054875. doi:10.1186/1471-2148-10-341

bringyou.to

Stephen C. Meyer: "I think the designer is God..." (Darwin, the marketing of Intelligent Design . Nightline ABC News, with Ted Koppel, August 10, 2005); Nancy Pearcey: "By contrast, design theory demonstrates that Christians can sit in the supernaturalist’s “chair” even in their professional lives, seeing the cosmos through the lens of a comprehensive biblical worldview. Intelligent Design steps boldly into the scientific arena to build a case based on empirical data. It takes Christianity out of the ineffectual realm of value and stakes out a cognitive claim in the realm of objective truth. It restores Christianity to its status as genuine knowledge, equipping us to defend it in the public arena". (Total Truth, Crossway Books, June 29, 2004, ISBN 1581344589, pp. 204-205)
Schönborn, Cardinal Christoph (2 de outubro de 2005). «Catechetical Lecture at St. Stephan's Cathedral, Vienna» (Reprint). Bring You To. Consultado em 22 de julho de 2007. Purpose and design in the natural world, [has] no difficulty [...] with the theory of evolution [within] the borders of scientific theory.

butler.edu

blue.butler.edu

«The Clergy Letter Project» ^{[ligação inativa]}

centerforinquiry.net

Forrest, Barbara (maio de 2007). «Understanding the Intelligent Design Creationist Movement: Its True Nature and Goals. A Position Paper from the Center for Inquiry, Office of Public Policy» (PDF). Washington, D.C.: Center for Inquiry, Inc. Consultado em 6 de agosto de 2007 .
Forrest, Barbara (maio de 2007), Understanding the Intelligent Design Creationist Movement: Its True Nature and Goals. A Position Paper from the Center for Inquiry, Office of Public Policy (PDF), Washington, D.C.: Center for Inquiry, Inc., consultado em 6 de agosto de 2007
Forrest, Barbara (May 2007). "Understanding the Intelligent Design Creationist Movement: Its True Nature and Goals. A Position Paper from the Center for Inquiry, Office of Public Policy" (PDF). Center for Inquiry, Inc.. Retrieved on 2007-08-22.; Forrest, B.C. and Gross, P.R., 2003, Evolution and the Wedge of Intelligent Design: The Trojan Horse Strategy, Oxford, Oxford University Press, 224 p., ISBN 0195157427
Understanding the Intelligent Design Creationist Movement: Its True Nature and Goals. A Position Paper from the Center for Inquiry, Office of Public Policy Barbara Forrest. May, 2007.

christianity.ca

Phillip Johnson: "Our strategy has been to change the subject a bit so that we can get the issue of Intelligent Design, which really means the reality of God, before the academic world and into the schools." Johnson 2004. Christianity.ca. Let's Be Intelligent About Darwin Arquivado em 22 de agosto de 2007, no Wayback Machine.. "This isn't really, and never has been a debate about science. It's about religion and philosophy." Johnson 1996. World Magazine. Witnesses For The Prosecution. "So the question is: "How to win?" That's when I began to develop what you now see full-fledged in the "wedge" strategy: "Stick with the most important thing"—the mechanism and the building up of information. Get the Bible and the Book of Genesis out of the debate because you do not want to raise the so-called Bible-science dichotomy. Phrase the argument in such a way that you can get it heard in the secular academy and in a way that tends to unify the religious dissenters. That means concentrating on, "Do you need a Creator to do the creating, or can nature do it on its own?" and refusing to get sidetracked onto other issues, which people are always trying to do." Johnson 2000. Touchstone magazine. Berkeley's Radical An Interview with Phillip E. Johnson^{[ligação inativa]} at the Internet Archive
Nickson, Elizabeth (10 de janeiro de 2003). «Let's Be Intelligent About Darwin». Christianity.ca. The Evangelical Fellowship of Canada. Consultado em 23 de julho de 2007. Arquivado do original em 22 de agosto de 2007. [Phillip E. Johnson quoted]: Our strategy has been to change the subject a bit so that we can get the issue of Intelligent Design, which really means the reality of God, before the academic world and into the schools.

chronicle.com

McMurtie, Beth (2001). «Darwinism Under Attack». The Chronicle Of Higher Education

citizenlink.org

William A. Dembski, when asked in an interview whether his research concluded that God is the Intelligent Designer, stated "I believe God created the world for a purpose. The Designer of intelligent design is, ultimately, the Christian God". Devon Williams (14 de dezembro de 2007). «CitizenLink: Friday Five: William A. Dembski». Focus on the Family, a California non profit religious corporation. Consultado em 15 de dezembro de 2007. Arquivado do original em 17 de dezembro de 2007

coe.int

assembly.coe.int

«The dangers of creationism in education». Council of Europe. Consultado em 3 de agosto de 2007. Arquivado do original em 17 de março de 2012
Lengagne, Guy (8 de junho de 2007). «The dangers of creationism in education». Committee on Culture, Science and Education, Socialist Group, Parliamentary Assembly. Council of Europe, Doc. 11297. Consultado em 17 de outubro de 2008. Arquivado do original em 13 de agosto de 2007

colorado.edu

Is The Universe Fine-Tuned For Us? Arquivado em 16 de julho de 2012, no Wayback Machine. Victor J. Stenger. University of Colorado. (PDF file)
The Anthropic Principle Victor J. Stenger. University of Colorado. (PDF file)

coralridge.org

"I have built an intellectual movement in the universities and churches that we call The Wedge, which is devoted to scholarship and writing that furthers this program of questioning the materialistic basis of science. [...] Now the way that I see the logic of our movement going is like this. The first thing you understand is that the Darwinian theory isn't true. It's falsified by all of the evidence and the logic is terrible. When you realize that, the next question that occurs to you is, well, where might you get the truth? [...] I start with John 1:1. In the beginning was the word. In the beginning was intelligence, purpose, and wisdom. The Bible had that right. And the materialist scientists are deluding themselves." Johnson 1999. Reclaiming America for Christ Conference. How the Evolution Debate Can Be Won Arquivado em 7 de novembro de 2007, no Wayback Machine.

creighton.edu

puffin.creighton.edu

Dembski, William A. «What is the position of the NRCSE on the teaching of intelligent design [ID] as an alternative to neo-Darwinian evolution in Nebraska schools?». Creighton University. Consultado em 23 de julho de 2007
Murphy, George L. (2002). «Intelligent Design as a Theological Problem» (Reprint). Creighton University. Consultado em 21 de julho de 2007

csic.es

ebd10.ebd.csic.es

Buell, Jon; Hearn, Virginia, eds. (1992). «Darwinism: Science or Philosophy» (PDF). Darwinism: Scientific Inference or Philosophical Preference? (Symposium). The Foundation for Thought and Ethics, Dallas Christian Leadership, and the C. S. Lewis Fellowship. Consultado em 23 de julho de 2007

csicop.org

Who Designed the Designer? Jason Rosenhouse. Creation & Intelligent Design Watch, Committee for the Scientific Investigation of Claims of the Paranormal.
Mooney, Chris (11 de setembro de 2003). «Polling for ID». Doubt and About. Committee for Skeptical Inquiry. Consultado em 16 de fevereiro de 2007. Arquivado do original em 27 de março de 2008
Edis, Taner (2001). «Darwin in Mind: Intelligent Design Meets Artificial Intelligence». Skeptical Inquirer Magazine. Consultado em 17 de julho de 2007. Arquivado do original em 15 de agosto de 2009

dailykos.com

Dr Barbara Forrest, Know Your Creationists: Know Your Allies
DarkSyde (11 de março de 2006). «Daily Kos: Know Your Creationists: Know Your Allies». interview with Barbara Forrest. Consultado em 5 de outubro de 2007

dallasnews.com

Raffaele, Martha (20 de dezembro de 2005). «Intelligent design policy struck down». Dallas Morning News. Consultado em 3 de setembro de 2007

darwin-online.org.uk

William Paley, Natural Theology: or, Evidences of the Existence and Attributes of the Deity, 1809, London, Twelfth Edition.

darwinproject.ac.uk

Letter 3154—Darwin, C. R. to Herschel, J. F. W., 23 May 1861 Arquivado em 6 de janeiro de 2009, no Wayback Machine., Charles Darwin, Darwin Correspondence Project, Letter 3154, May 23, 1861.

designinference.com

Leading intelligent design proponent William Dembski (2001) argues the opposing view in IS INTELLIGENT DESIGN A FORM OF NATURAL THEOLOGY? Arquivado em 2012-07-29 na Archive.today
Dembski. 2005. Intelligent Design's Contribution to the Debate Over Evolution: A Reply to Henry Morris.Reply to Henry Morris Arquivado em 2012-07-29 na Archive.today
Dembski, William A. (2001). «Is Intelligent Design a Form of Natural Theology?». Design Inference Website. Consultado em 19 de julho de 2007. Arquivado do original em 29 de julho de 2012

designinteligentebrasil.com.br

«Manifesto do Design Inteligente». Sociedade Brasileira do Desenho Inteligente. Consultado em 13 de fevereiro de 2016 ^{[ligação inativa]}

discovery.org

«Top Questions-1.What is the theory of intelligent design?». Discovery Institute. Consultado em 13 de maio de 2007 .
"Q. Has the Discovery Institute been a leader in the intelligent design movement? A. Yes, the Discovery Institute's Center for Science and Culture. Q. And are almost all of the individuals who are involved with the intelligent design movement associated with the Discovery Institute? A. All of the leaders are, yes". Barbara Forrest, 2005, testifying in the Kitzmiller v. Dover Area School District trial. «Kitzmiller v. Dover Area School District Trial transcript: Day 6 (October 5), PM Session, Part 1.». The TalkOrigins Archive. 2005. Consultado em 19 de julho de 2007
• "The Discovery Institute is the ideological and strategic backbone behind the eruption of skirmishes over science in school districts and state capitals across the country". In: Wilgoren, J (21 de agosto de 2005). «Politicized Scholars Put Evolution on the Defensive» (PDF). The New York Times. Consultado em 19 de julho de 2007
• «Who is behind the ID movement?». Frequently Asked Questions About "Intelligent Design". American Civil Liberties Union. 16 de setembro de 2005. Consultado em 20 de julho de 2007
• Kahn, JP (27 de julho de 2005). «The Evolution of George Gilder. The Author And Tech-Sector Guru Has A New Cause To Create Controversy With: Intelligent Design». The Boston Globe. Consultado em 19 de julho de 2007
• «Who's Who of Intelligent Design Proponents». Science & Religion Guide. Science & Theology News. 2005. Consultado em 20 de julho de 2007 (PDF file from Discovery Institute).
• "The engine behind the ID movement is the Discovery Institute". Attie, Alan D.; Elliot Sober, Ronald L. Numbers, Richard M. Amasino, Beth Cox4, Terese Berceau, Thomas Powell and Michael M. Cox (2006). «Defending science education against intelligent design: a call to action». Journal of Clinical Investigation 116:1134–1138. doi:10.1172/JCI28449. A publication of the American Society for Clinical Investigation. Consultado em 20 de julho de 2007
«Top Questions about intelligent design». Discovery Institute. Consultado em 13 de maio de 2007
Stephen C. Meyer and Paul A. Nelson, May 1, 1996, CSC – Getting Rid of the Unfair Rules, A book review, Origins & Design, Retrieved 2007-05-20,
• Phillip E. Johnson, August 31, 1996, Starting a Conversation about Evolution, Access Research Network Phillip Johnson Files, Retrieved 2007-05-20,
• Stephen C. Meyer, December 1, 2002, Ignatius Press. The Scientific Status of Intelligent Design: The Methodological Equivalence of Naturalistic and Non-Naturalistic Origins Theories,
• Kitzmiller v. Dover Area School District (2005), Whether ID Is Science,
• Kitzmiller v. Dover Area School District (2005), Lead defense expert Professor Behe admitted that his broadened definition of science, which encompasses ID, would also include astrology.
• See also Evolution of Kansas science standards continues as Darwin's theories regain prominence International Herald Tribune, February 13, 2007, Retrieved 2007-05-20.
Orr, H. Allen (30 de maio de 2005). «Devolution». The New Yorker This article draws from the following exchange of letters in which Behe admits to sloppy prose and non-logical proof: Behe, M.; Dembski, Wells, Nelson, Berlinski (26 de março de 2003). «Has Darwin met his match? Letters—An exchange over ID». Discovery Institute. Consultado em 30 de novembro de 2006
Sewell, Granville (28 de dezembro de 2005). «Evolution's Thermodynamic Failure». The American Spectator. Consultado em 16 de fevereiro de 2007 Also available from the Discovery Institute, retrieved on July 7, 2007.
"The theory of Intelligent Design holds that certain features of the universe and of living things are best explained by an intelligent cause, not an undirected process such as natural selection." Discovery Institute. What is Intelligent Design? Questions About Intelligent Design
Discovery Institute fellows and staff. [9] Arquivado em 14 de julho de 2004, no Wayback Machine. Center for Science and Culture fellows and staff. [10] Arquivado em 9 de fevereiro de 2014, no Wayback Machine.
"...intelligent design does not address metaphysical and religious questions such as the nature or identity of the designer," and "...the nature, moral character and purposes of this intelligence lie beyond the competence of science and must be left to religion and philosophy". In: «Discovery Institute Truth Sheet # 09-05 Does intelligent design postulate a "supernatural creator?». Consultado em 19 de julho de 2007
Watanabe, Teresa (25 de março de 2001). «Enlisting Science to Find the Fingerprints of a Creator». Los Angeles Times. Consultado em 22 de julho de 2007. [Phillip E. Johnson quoted]: We are taking an intuition most people have and making it a scientific and academic enterprise ... We are removing the most important cultural roadblock to accepting the role of God as creator.
Meyer, Stephen C. (1 de dezembro de 2002). «The Scientific Status of Intelligent Design: The Methodological Equivalence of Naturalistic and Non-Naturalistic Origins Theories». Center for Science and Culture, Discovery Institute. Consultado em 19 de julho de 2007
Meyer, S.C. (2004). «The origin of biological information and the higher taxonomic categories». Proceedings of the Biological Society of Washington. 117 (2): 213–239. Consultado em 10 de maio de 2007
Staff (julho de 2007). «Peer-Reviewed, Peer-Edited, and other Scientific Publications Supporting the Theory of Intelligent Design (Annotated)». Discovery Institute. Consultado em 17 de julho de 2007
Meyer, Stephen C.; Allen, W. Peter (15 de julho de 2004). «Unlocking the Mystery of Life». Center for Science and Culture, Discovery Institute. Consultado em 13 de julho de 2007

dissentfromdarwin.org

A Scientific Dissent From Darwinism (em inglês)

doesgodexist.org

Evidence For Design In The Universe Arquivado em 14 de abril de 2010, no Wayback Machine. por Hugh Ross, Ph.D. in Astronomy - ver comentários ao final da tabela.

doi.org

dx.doi.org

Boudry, Maarten; Blancke, Stefaan; Braeckman, Johan (Dezembro de 2010). «Irreducible Incoherence and Intelligent Design: A Look into the Conceptual Toolbox of a Pseudoscience». Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press. The Quarterly Review of Biology. 85 (4): 473–482. PMID 21243965. doi:10.1086/656904 Article available from Universiteit Gent
Nature Methods Editorial (2007). «An intelligently designed response». Nat. Methods. 4 (12). 983 páginas. doi:10.1038/nmeth1207-983
Mark Greener (2007). «Taking on creationism. Which arguments and evidence counter pseudoscience?». EMBO Reports. 8 (12): 1107–1109. doi:10.1038/sj.embor.7401131
Finnigan, Gregory C.; Victor (19 de janeiro de 2012). «Evolution of increased complexity in a molecular machine». Nature (em inglês). 481 (7381): 360-364. ISSN 0028-0836. PMID 22230956. doi:10.1038/nature10724
Del Bem, Luiz EV; Michel GA Vincentz (5 de novembro de 2010). «Evolution of xyloglucan-related genes in green plants». BMC Evolutionary Biology (em inglês). 10 (1). 341 páginas. ISSN 1471-2148. PMID 21054875. doi:10.1186/1471-2148-10-341
For example, Bridgham et al. showed that gradual evolutionary mechanisms can produce complex protein-protein interaction systems from simpler precursors. Bridgham; et al. (2006). «Evolution of Hormone-Receptor Complexity by Molecular Exploitation». Science. 312 (5770): 97–101. doi:10.1126/science.1123348
Enserink, Martin (3 de junho de 2005). «Evolution Politics: Is Holland Becoming the Kansas of Europe?». Science. 308 (5727). 1394 páginas. PMID 15933170. doi:10.1126/science.308.5727.1394b
Silva, Heslley Machado (1 de setembro de 2017). «Intelligent design endangers education». Science (em inglês). 357 (6354): 880–880. ISSN 0036-8075. PMID 28860376. doi:10.1126/science.aao3245

dtu.dk

cbs.dtu.dk

David Ussery, "A Biochemist's Response to 'The Biochemical Challenge to Evolution' Arquivado em 22 de outubro de 2004, no Wayback Machine."

dutchnews.nl

«Cabinet ministers announced (update 2)». DutchNews.nl. 13 de fevereiro de 2007. Consultado em 31 de maio de 2008

ethz.ch

isn.ethz.ch

Jones, Dorian L (12 de março de 2008). «Turkey's survival of the fittest». ISN Security Watch. Consultado em 13 de março de 2008

evolutionnews.org

Jonathan Witt (20 de dezembro de 2005). «Evolution News & Views: Dover Judge Regurgitates Mythological History of Intelligent Design». Discovery Institute. Consultado em 5 de outubro de 2007. Arquivado do original em 18 de novembro de 2007
Crowther, Robert (20 de dezembro de 2005). «Dover Intelligent Design Decision Criticized as a Futile Attempt to Censor Science Education». Evolution News & Views. Discovery Institute. Consultado em 3 de setembro de 2007

expelledexposed.com

Intelligent Design Arquivado em 25 de outubro de 2008, no Wayback Machine., Expelled Exposed, National Center for Science Education

faithnet.org.uk

Thomas Aquinas, Summa Theologiae. "Thomas Aquinas' 'Five Ways' (archive link)" in faithnet.org.uk.

fandm.edu

server1.fandm.edu

Murray, Michael J. «Natural Providence (or Design Trouble)» (PDF). Franklin & Marshall College. Consultado em 23 de julho de 2007. Arquivado do original (PDF) em 20 de agosto de 2006

findarticles.com

with Teleology: The Genetic Programming Heuristic Approach to Modeling

findlaw.com

caselaw.lp.findlaw.com

Kitzmiller v. Dover Area School District (2005), Context pg. 32 ff, citing Edwards v. Aguillard.
Edwards v. Aguillard

gazetadopovo.com.br

«Confira o manifesto do Design Inteligente - Tubo de Ensaio». Tubo de Ensaio. 18 de novembro de 2014

geneticprogramming.us

«Cópia arquivada». Consultado em 2 de março de 2011. Arquivado do original em 9 de março de 2011

globo.com

oglobo.globo.com

«Novo presidente da Capes defende debate de criacionismo como contraponto à teoria da evolução». O Globo. 24 de janeiro de 2020. Consultado em 16 de fevereiro de 2020

g1.globo.com

«Criticado por apoiar criacionismo, novo presidente da Capes diz em nota que defende 'liberdade de cátedra'». G1. Consultado em 16 de fevereiro de 2020

gov.br

«CAPES». CAPES. Consultado em 22 de fevereiro de 2023

guardian.co.uk

Randerson, James (27 de novembro de 2006). «Revealed: rise of creationism in UK schools». The Guardian. Consultado em 17 de outubro de 2008

harrisinteractive.com

«Nearly Two-thirds of U.S. Adults Believe Human Beings Were Created by God». The Harris Poll #52. Harris Interactive. 6 de julho de 2005. Consultado em 13 de julho de 2007. Arquivado do original em 17 de dezembro de 2005

harunyahya.com

«The "Intelligent Design" Distraction». Harun Yahya International. 2007. Consultado em 20 de julho de 2007 ^{[ligação inativa]}

harvard.edu

hcs.harvard.edu

National Science Teachers Association, a professional association of 55,000 science teachers and administrators in a 2005 press release: "We stand with the nation's leading scientific organizations and scientists, including Dr. John Marburger, the president's top science advisor, in stating that intelligent design is not science. ...It is simply not fair to present pseudoscience to students in the science classroom". National Science Teachers Association Disappointed About Intelligent Design Comments Made by President Bush National Science Teachers Association Press Release August 3, 2005.
• "for most members of the mainstream scientific community, ID is not a scientific theory, but a creationist pseudoscience". Trojan Horse or Legitimate Science: Deconstructing the Debate over Intelligent Design Arquivado em 24 de julho de 2007, no Wayback Machine. David Mu. Harvard Science Review, Volume 19, Issue 1, Fall 2005.
• "Creationists are repackaging their message as the pseudoscience of intelligent design theory". Professional Ethics Report Arquivado em 3 de janeiro de 2011, no Wayback Machine. American Association for the Advancement of Science, 2001.
"for most members of the mainstream scientific community, ID is not a scientific theory, but a creationist pseudoscience". Trojan Horse or Legitimate Science: Deconstructing the Debate over Intelligent Design Arquivado em 24 de julho de 2007, no Wayback Machine., David Mu, Harvard Science Review, Volume 19, Issue 1, Fall 2005.
• "Creationists are repackaging their message as the pseudoscience of intelligent design theory". Professional Ethics Report Arquivado em 3 de janeiro de 2011, no Wayback Machine., American Association for the Advancement of Science, 2001.
• Conclusion of Kitzmiller v. Dover Area School District Ruling

hcdi.net

According to the poll, 18% of the physicians believed that God created humans exactly as they appear today. Another 42% believed that God initiated and guided an evolutionary process that has led to current human beings. The poll also found that "an overwhelming majority of Jewish doctors (83%) and half of Catholic doctors (51%) believe that intelligent design is simply "a religiously inspired pseudo-science rather than a legitimate scientific speculation". The poll also found that "more than half of Protestant doctors (63%) believe that intelligent design is a "legitimate scientific speculation".
«Majority of Physicians Give the Nod to Evolution Over Intelligent Design». Consultado em 8 de outubro de 2007. Arquivado do original em 23 de julho de 2011

hssonline.org

Edis, Taner (2008). «The History of Science Society : The Society». Islamic Creationism: A Short History. History of Science Society. pp. Newsletter, Vol. 37, No.1. Consultado em 23 de fevereiro de 2008

ideacenter.org

«Primer: Intelligent Design Theory in a Nutshell» (PDF). Intelligent Design and Evolution Awareness Center. 2004. Consultado em 13 de maio de 2007
• «Intelligent Design». Intelligent Design network. 2007. Consultado em 13 de maio de 2007
IDEA "One need not fully understand the origin or identity of the designer to determine that an object was designed. Thus, this question is essentially irrelevant to intelligent design theory, which merely seeks to detect if an object was designed ... Intelligent design theory cannot address the identity or origin of the designer—it is a philosophical / religious question that lies outside the domain of scientific inquiry. Christianity postulates the religious answer to this question that the designer is God who by definition is eternally existent and has no origin. There is no logical philosophical impossibility with this being the case (akin to Aristotle's 'unmoved mover') as a religious answer to the origin of the designer..." FAQ: Who designed the designer? FAQ: Who designed the designer?
«Primer: Intelligent Design Theory in a Nutshell». Intelligent Design and Evolution Awareness Center. 2007. Consultado em 14 de julho de 2007

iht.com

Stephen C. Meyer and Paul A. Nelson, May 1, 1996, CSC – Getting Rid of the Unfair Rules, A book review, Origins & Design, Retrieved 2007-05-20,
• Phillip E. Johnson, August 31, 1996, Starting a Conversation about Evolution, Access Research Network Phillip Johnson Files, Retrieved 2007-05-20,
• Stephen C. Meyer, December 1, 2002, Ignatius Press. The Scientific Status of Intelligent Design: The Methodological Equivalence of Naturalistic and Non-Naturalistic Origins Theories,
• Kitzmiller v. Dover Area School District (2005), Whether ID Is Science,
• Kitzmiller v. Dover Area School District (2005), Lead defense expert Professor Behe admitted that his broadened definition of science, which encompasses ID, would also include astrology.
• See also Evolution of Kansas science standards continues as Darwin's theories regain prominence International Herald Tribune, February 13, 2007, Retrieved 2007-05-20.

illustramedia.com

«WIRED Magazine response». Illustra Media. Consultado em 13 de julho de 2007. Arquivado do original em 20 de dezembro de 2008. It's also important that you read a well developed rebuttal to Wired's misleading accusations. Links to both the article and a response by the Discovery Institute (our partners in the production of Unlocking the Mystery of Life and The Privileged Planet)

infidels.org

Barbara Forrest. 2001. "The Wedge at Work: Intelligent Design Creationism and Its Critics
Forrest, Barbara (2000). «Methodological Naturalism and Philosophical Naturalism: Clarifying the Connection». Philo. 3 (2): 7–29. Consultado em 27 de julho de 2007

intelligentdesignnetwork.org

«Primer: Intelligent Design Theory in a Nutshell» (PDF). Intelligent Design and Evolution Awareness Center. 2004. Consultado em 13 de maio de 2007
• «Intelligent Design». Intelligent Design network. 2007. Consultado em 13 de maio de 2007

interacademies.net

«IAP Statement on the Teaching of Evolution» (PDF). The Interacademy Panel on International Issues. 21 de junho de 2006. Consultado em 17 de outubro de 2008. Arquivado do original (PDF) em 27 de setembro de 2007 Joint statement issued by the national science academies of 67 countries, including the United Kingdom's Royal Society.

jci.org

"Q. Has the Discovery Institute been a leader in the intelligent design movement? A. Yes, the Discovery Institute's Center for Science and Culture. Q. And are almost all of the individuals who are involved with the intelligent design movement associated with the Discovery Institute? A. All of the leaders are, yes". Barbara Forrest, 2005, testifying in the Kitzmiller v. Dover Area School District trial. «Kitzmiller v. Dover Area School District Trial transcript: Day 6 (October 5), PM Session, Part 1.». The TalkOrigins Archive. 2005. Consultado em 19 de julho de 2007
• "The Discovery Institute is the ideological and strategic backbone behind the eruption of skirmishes over science in school districts and state capitals across the country". In: Wilgoren, J (21 de agosto de 2005). «Politicized Scholars Put Evolution on the Defensive» (PDF). The New York Times. Consultado em 19 de julho de 2007
• «Who is behind the ID movement?». Frequently Asked Questions About "Intelligent Design". American Civil Liberties Union. 16 de setembro de 2005. Consultado em 20 de julho de 2007
• Kahn, JP (27 de julho de 2005). «The Evolution of George Gilder. The Author And Tech-Sector Guru Has A New Cause To Create Controversy With: Intelligent Design». The Boston Globe. Consultado em 19 de julho de 2007
• «Who's Who of Intelligent Design Proponents». Science & Religion Guide. Science & Theology News. 2005. Consultado em 20 de julho de 2007 (PDF file from Discovery Institute).
• "The engine behind the ID movement is the Discovery Institute". Attie, Alan D.; Elliot Sober, Ronald L. Numbers, Richard M. Amasino, Beth Cox4, Terese Berceau, Thomas Powell and Michael M. Cox (2006). «Defending science education against intelligent design: a call to action». Journal of Clinical Investigation 116:1134–1138. doi:10.1172/JCI28449. A publication of the American Society for Clinical Investigation. Consultado em 20 de julho de 2007

jmu.edu

math.jmu.edu

Jason Rosenhouse, (2001). How Anti-Evolutionists Abuse Mathematics Arquivado em 16 de maio de 2005, no Wayback Machine. The Mathematical Intelligencer, Vol. 23, No. 4, Fall 2001, pp. 3-8.

johnhawks.net

Hawks, John (2005). «The President and the teaching of evolution». John Hawks Weblog. Consultado em 19 de julho de 2007

leaderu.com

Charles B. Thaxton. «In Pursuit of Intelligent Causes: Some Historical Background». 23–26 de junho de 1988, revised July 1988 and May 1991. Consultado em 6 de outubro de 2007
Phillip Johnson: "Our strategy has been to change the subject a bit so that we can get the issue of Intelligent Design, which really means the reality of God, before the academic world and into the schools." Johnson 2004. Christianity.ca. Let's Be Intelligent About Darwin Arquivado em 22 de agosto de 2007, no Wayback Machine.. "This isn't really, and never has been a debate about science. It's about religion and philosophy." Johnson 1996. World Magazine. Witnesses For The Prosecution. "So the question is: "How to win?" That's when I began to develop what you now see full-fledged in the "wedge" strategy: "Stick with the most important thing"—the mechanism and the building up of information. Get the Bible and the Book of Genesis out of the debate because you do not want to raise the so-called Bible-science dichotomy. Phrase the argument in such a way that you can get it heard in the secular academy and in a way that tends to unify the religious dissenters. That means concentrating on, "Do you need a Creator to do the creating, or can nature do it on its own?" and refusing to get sidetracked onto other issues, which people are always trying to do." Johnson 2000. Touchstone magazine. Berkeley's Radical An Interview with Phillip E. Johnson^{[ligação inativa]} at the Internet Archive
Dembski. The Act of Creation: Bridging Transcendence and Immanence Arquivado em 25 de janeiro de 2007, no Wayback Machine.
Belz, Joel (30 de novembro de 1996). «Witnesses For The Prosecution» (Reprint by Leadership U.). World Magazine. 11 (28). 18 páginas. Consultado em 23 de julho de 2007

lehigh.edu

See, e.g., Jill E. Schneider (Dept. of Biological Sciences, Lehigh University, 2005) "Thoughts on Evolution and Intelligent Design" [13] Arquivado em 2 de setembro de 2006, no Wayback Machine. "Q: Why couldn't intelligent design also be a scientific theory? A : The idea of intelligent design might or might not be true, but when presented as a scientific hypothesis, it is not useful because it is based on weak assumptions, lacks supporting data and terminates further thought".

lhup.edu

Dr. Donald E. Simanek. Intelligent Design: The Glass is Empty Arquivado em 14 de julho de 2012, no Wayback Machine.

lisburntoday.co.uk

«Dup Call For Schools To Teach Creation Passed By Council—Lisburn Today». Ulster Star. 26 de setembro de 2007. Consultado em 17 de outubro de 2008

ljworld.com

media.ljworld.com

«Nobel Laureates Initiative» (PDF). The Elie Wiesel Foundation for Humanity. 9 de setembro de 2005. Consultado em 19 de julho de 2007. Arquivado do original (PDF) em 7 de outubro de 2005 The September 2005 statement by 38 Nobel laureates stated that: "Intelligent design is fundamentally unscientific; it cannot be tested as scientific theory because its central conclusion is based on belief in the intervention of a supernatural agent".

metanexus.net

"Dembski chides me for never using the term "intelligent design" without conjoining it to "creationism". He implies (though never explicitly asserts) that he and others in his movement are not creationists and that it is incorrect to discuss them in such terms, suggesting that doing so is merely a rhetorical ploy to "rally the troops". (2) Am I (and the many others who see Dembski's movement in the same way) misrepresenting their position? The basic notion of creationism is the rejection of biological evolution in favor of special creation, where the latter is understood to be supernatural. Beyond this there is considerable variability...", from Wizards of ID: Reply to Dembski Arquivado em 20 de dezembro de 2008, no Wayback Machine., Robert T. Pennock, p. 645–667 of Intelligent Design Creationism and Its Critics: Philosophical, Theological, and Scientific Perspectives, Robert T. Pennock (editor), Cambridge, MIT Press, 2001, 825 p., ISBN 0262661241; Pennock, R.T., 1999, Tower of Babel: Evidence Against the New Creationism, Cambridge, MIT Press, 440 p.

millerandlevine.com

The Collapse of "Irreducible Complexity" Kenneth R. Miller Brown University [4]

mit.edu

classics.mit.edu

Plato. «Timaeus». Internet Classics Archive. classics.mit.edu. Consultado em 22 de julho de 2007

msn.com

msnbc.msn.com

Associated Press (20 de dezembro de 2005). «Judge rules against 'intelligent design'». MSNBC. Consultado em 17 de outubro de 2008

msu.edu

"Q. Has the Discovery Institute been a leader in the intelligent design movement? A. Yes, the Discovery Institute's Center for Science and Culture. Q. And are almost all of the individuals who are involved with the intelligent design movement associated with the Discovery Institute? A. All of the leaders are, yes". Barbara Forrest, 2005, testifying in the Kitzmiller v. Dover Area School District trial. «Kitzmiller v. Dover Area School District Trial transcript: Day 6 (October 5), PM Session, Part 1.». The TalkOrigins Archive. 2005. Consultado em 19 de julho de 2007
• "The Discovery Institute is the ideological and strategic backbone behind the eruption of skirmishes over science in school districts and state capitals across the country". In: Wilgoren, J (21 de agosto de 2005). «Politicized Scholars Put Evolution on the Defensive» (PDF). The New York Times. Consultado em 19 de julho de 2007
• «Who is behind the ID movement?». Frequently Asked Questions About "Intelligent Design". American Civil Liberties Union. 16 de setembro de 2005. Consultado em 20 de julho de 2007
• Kahn, JP (27 de julho de 2005). «The Evolution of George Gilder. The Author And Tech-Sector Guru Has A New Cause To Create Controversy With: Intelligent Design». The Boston Globe. Consultado em 19 de julho de 2007
• «Who's Who of Intelligent Design Proponents». Science & Religion Guide. Science & Theology News. 2005. Consultado em 20 de julho de 2007 (PDF file from Discovery Institute).
• "The engine behind the ID movement is the Discovery Institute". Attie, Alan D.; Elliot Sober, Ronald L. Numbers, Richard M. Amasino, Beth Cox4, Terese Berceau, Thomas Powell and Michael M. Cox (2006). «Defending science education against intelligent design: a call to action». Journal of Clinical Investigation 116:1134–1138. doi:10.1172/JCI28449. A publication of the American Society for Clinical Investigation. Consultado em 20 de julho de 2007

nabt.org

«NABT's Statement on Teaching Evolution». National Association of Biology Teachers. Consultado em 9 de março de 2014. Arquivado do original em 27 de setembro de 2006

nagt.org

Who Believes What? Clearing up Confusion over Intelligent Design and Young-Earth Creationism, Marcus R. Ross, Journal of Geoscience Education, v. 53, n. 3, May, 2005, p. 319–323

nap.edu

National Academy of Sciences, 1999 Science and Creationism: A View from the National Academy of Sciences, Second Edition

natcenscied.org

The Creation/Evolution Continuum Arquivado em 9 de maio de 2008, no Wayback Machine., Eugenie Scott, National Center for Science Education Reports, v. 19, n. 4, p. 16–17, 23–25, July/August, 1999.; Scott, E.C., 2004, Evolution vs. Creationism: An Introduction, Westport, Greenwood Press, 296p, ISBN 0520246500

nature.com

Finnigan, Gregory C.; Victor (19 de janeiro de 2012). «Evolution of increased complexity in a molecular machine». Nature (em inglês). 481 (7381): 360-364. ISSN 0028-0836. PMID 22230956. doi:10.1038/nature10724
Our place in the Multiverse Joseph Silk. Nature, Volume 443 Number 7108, September 14, 2006.

ncccusa.org

Resseger, Jan (Chair) (2006). «Science, Religion, and the Teaching of Evolution in Public School Science Classes» (PDF). Committee on Public Education and Literacy. National Council of Churches. Consultado em 17 de julho de 2007. Arquivado do original (PDF) em 11 de julho de 2007

ncse.com

Project Steve | NCSE

ncseweb.org

See: 1) List of scientific societies rejecting intelligent design 2) Kitzmiller v. Dover page 83. 3) The Discovery Institute's A Scientific Dissent From Darwinism petition begun in 2001 has been signed by "over 700 scientists" as of August 20, 2006. A four day A Scientific Support for Darwinism petition gained 7733 signatories from scientists opposing ID. The AAAS, the largest association of scientists in the U.S., has 120,000 members, and firmly rejects ID. More than 70,000 Australian scientists and educators condemn teaching of intelligent design in school science classes List of statements from scientific professional organizations Arquivado em 28 de março de 2008, no Wayback Machine. on the status intelligent design and other forms of creationism. According to The New York Times "There is no credible scientific challenge to the theory of evolution as an explanation for the complexity and diversity of life on earth". Dean, Cordelia (27 de setembro de 2007). «Scientists Feel Miscast in Film on Life's Origin». The New York Times. Consultado em 28 de setembro de 2007
Eugenie C. Scott; Gordon E. Uno (1989). «NCSE Resource». Introduction to NCSE Bookwatch Reviews for Of Pandas and People. Consultado em 24 de setembro de 2007
"Although science has made great progress by limiting itself to explaining only through natural causes, Johnson would have us allow the occasional supernatural intervention for those phenomena that cause problems for his particular theology". Darwin On Trial: A Review by Eugenie C. Scott. NCSE
Nick Matzke (2004). «NCSE Resource». Introduction: Of Pandas and People, the foundational work of the 'Intelligent Design' movement. NCSE. Consultado em 24 de setembro de 2007
"...the ID movement has not proposed a scientific means of testing its claims..." AAAS Board Resolution on Intelligent Design Theory Arquivado em 28 de março de 2008, no Wayback Machine. American Association for the Advancement of Science, 2002.
Nick Matzke (2006). «NCSE Resource -- 9.0. Matzke (2006): The Story of the Pandas Drafts». National Center for Science Education. Consultado em 14 de novembro de 2007
*Nick Matzke (2006). «Missing Link discovered!». National Center for Science Education. Consultado em 14 de novembro de 2007. Arquivado do original em 14 de janeiro de 2007
«NCSE Resource». Evolving Banners at the Discovery Institute. 29 de agosto de 2002. Consultado em 7 de outubro de 2007
«"The evolution wars" in Time». National Center for Science Education. 11 de agosto de 2005. Consultado em 17 de outubro de 2008
Scott, Eugenie C. (7 de dezembro de 2000). «The Creation/Evolution Continuum». National Center for Science Education. Consultado em 22 de julho de 2007. Arquivado do original em 14 de julho de 2007
Scott, Eugenie C.; Branch, Glenn (2002). «"Intelligent Design" Not Accepted by Most Scientists». National Center for Science Education. Consultado em 14 de julho de 2007
Padian, Kevin; Nick Matzke (4 de janeiro de 2006). «Discovery Institute tries to "swift-boat" Judge Jones». National Center for Science Education. Consultado em 3 de setembro de 2007
«NCSE Resource—Council of Europe approves resolution against creationism». National Center for Science Education. 4 de outubro de 2007. Consultado em 5 de outubro de 2007
- «Council of Europe firmly opposes creationism in school». Reuters. Consultado em 5 de outubro de 2007
- «NCSE Resource—Guidance on creationism for British teachers». NCSE. 25 de setembro de 2007. Consultado em 30 de setembro de 2007
- Edis, Taner. «Cloning Creationism in Turkey». National Center for Science Education. Consultado em 13 de julho de 2007
www2.ncseweb.org
- "ID's rejection of naturalism in any form logically entails its appeal to the only alternative, supernaturalism, as a putatively scientific explanation for natural phenomena. This makes ID a religious belief". Expert Witness Report Arquivado em 10 de julho de 2007, no Wayback Machine. Barbara Forrest Kitzmiller v. Dover Area School District, April, 2005.
- Nick Matzke (2006). «NCSE Resource -- 9.0. Matzke (2006): The Story of the Pandas Drafts». National Center for Science Education. Consultado em 14 de novembro de 2007
  *Nick Matzke (2006). «Missing Link discovered!». National Center for Science Education. Consultado em 14 de novembro de 2007. Arquivado do original em 14 de janeiro de 2007

newscientist.com

[7] New Scientist, 28 Julho de 2007

newyorker.com

Orr, H. Allen (30 de maio de 2005). «Devolution». The New Yorker This article draws from the following exchange of letters in which Behe admits to sloppy prose and non-logical proof: Behe, M.; Dembski, Wells, Nelson, Berlinski (26 de março de 2003). «Has Darwin met his match? Letters—An exchange over ID». Discovery Institute. Consultado em 30 de novembro de 2006

nih.gov

ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

Boudry, Maarten; Blancke, Stefaan; Braeckman, Johan (Dezembro de 2010). «Irreducible Incoherence and Intelligent Design: A Look into the Conceptual Toolbox of a Pseudoscience». Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press. The Quarterly Review of Biology. 85 (4): 473–482. PMID 21243965. doi:10.1086/656904 Article available from Universiteit Gent
Finnigan, Gregory C.; Victor (19 de janeiro de 2012). «Evolution of increased complexity in a molecular machine». Nature (em inglês). 481 (7381): 360-364. ISSN 0028-0836. PMID 22230956. doi:10.1038/nature10724
Del Bem, Luiz EV; Michel GA Vincentz (5 de novembro de 2010). «Evolution of xyloglucan-related genes in green plants». BMC Evolutionary Biology (em inglês). 10 (1). 341 páginas. ISSN 1471-2148. PMID 21054875. doi:10.1186/1471-2148-10-341
Enserink, Martin (3 de junho de 2005). «Evolution Politics: Is Holland Becoming the Kansas of Europe?». Science. 308 (5727). 1394 páginas. PMID 15933170. doi:10.1126/science.308.5727.1394b
Silva, Heslley Machado (1 de setembro de 2017). «Intelligent design endangers education». Science (em inglês). 357 (6354): 880–880. ISSN 0036-8075. PMID 28860376. doi:10.1126/science.aao3245

nmsr.org

«Sandia National Laboratories says that the Intelligent Design Network (IDNet-NM/Zogby) "Lab Poll" is BOGUS!». New Mexicans for Science and Reason. Consultado em 13 de julho de 2007

nsta.org

National Science Teachers Association, a professional association of 55,000 science teachers and administrators in a 2005 press release: "We stand with the nation's leading scientific organizations and scientists, including Dr. John Marburger, the president's top science advisor, in stating that intelligent design is not science. ...It is simply not fair to present pseudoscience to students in the science classroom". National Science Teachers Association Disappointed About Intelligent Design Comments Made by President Bush National Science Teachers Association Press Release August 3, 2005.
• "for most members of the mainstream scientific community, ID is not a scientific theory, but a creationist pseudoscience". Trojan Horse or Legitimate Science: Deconstructing the Debate over Intelligent Design Arquivado em 24 de julho de 2007, no Wayback Machine. David Mu. Harvard Science Review, Volume 19, Issue 1, Fall 2005.
• "Creationists are repackaging their message as the pseudoscience of intelligent design theory". Professional Ethics Report Arquivado em 3 de janeiro de 2011, no Wayback Machine. American Association for the Advancement of Science, 2001.

number-10.gov.uk

«NoCreSciEd - epetition reply». Her Majesty's Stationery Office. 21 de junho de 2007. Consultado em 13 de julho de 2007. Arquivado do original em 2 de junho de 2008

nwsource.com

seattletimes.nwsource.com

Shaw, Linda (31 de março de 2005). «Does Seattle group "teach controversy" or contribute to it?». Seattle Times

nytimes.com

See: 1) List of scientific societies rejecting intelligent design 2) Kitzmiller v. Dover page 83. 3) The Discovery Institute's A Scientific Dissent From Darwinism petition begun in 2001 has been signed by "over 700 scientists" as of August 20, 2006. A four day A Scientific Support for Darwinism petition gained 7733 signatories from scientists opposing ID. The AAAS, the largest association of scientists in the U.S., has 120,000 members, and firmly rejects ID. More than 70,000 Australian scientists and educators condemn teaching of intelligent design in school science classes List of statements from scientific professional organizations Arquivado em 28 de março de 2008, no Wayback Machine. on the status intelligent design and other forms of creationism. According to The New York Times "There is no credible scientific challenge to the theory of evolution as an explanation for the complexity and diversity of life on earth". Dean, Cordelia (27 de setembro de 2007). «Scientists Feel Miscast in Film on Life's Origin». The New York Times. Consultado em 28 de setembro de 2007
William Safire. The New York Times. August 21, 2005.On Language: Neo-Creo
Goodstein, Laurie (4 de dezembro de 2005). «Intelligent Design Might Be Meeting Its Maker». The New York Times. Consultado em 19 de julho de 2007

origins.org

Charles B. Thaxton, Ph.D. (13–16 de novembro de 1986). «DNA, Design and the Origin of Life». Christian Leadership Ministries. Consultado em 10 de outubro de 2007. Arquivado do original em 27 de setembro de 2007

pandasthumb.org

Nick Matzke; Jon Buell (13 de outubro de 2005). «I guess ID really was "Creationism's Trojan Horse" after all». The Panda's Thumb. Consultado em 5 de outubro de 2007. Arquivado do original em 24 de junho de 2008 , links to Wayback Machine for pdf.
Irreducible complexity of these examples is disputed; see Kitzmiller, pp. 76–78, and Ken Miller Webcast Arquivado em 13 de junho de 2006, no Wayback Machine.
The Panda's Thumb. review of The Privileged Planet Arquivado em 25 de janeiro de 2008, no Wayback Machine.
«Sternberg vs. Smithsonian - The Panda's Thumb». pandasthumb.org. Consultado em 29 de novembro de 2008

parliament.uk

publications.parliament.uk

«Written Answers». Daily Hansard. Parliament of the United Kingdom. 1 de novembro de 2006. Consultado em 13 de julho de 2007
«Schools: Intelligent Design». Daily Hansard. Parliament of the United Kingdom. 18 de dezembro de 2006. Consultado em 13 de julho de 2007

pewforum.org

Powell, Michael (21 de dezembro de 2005). «Judge Rules Against 'Intelligent Design'». The Washington Post. Consultado em 3 de setembro de 2007

pharyngula.org

«Creationism and the Daubert test?». PZ Myers, Pharyngula.org. 21 de maio de 2005

prospect.org

Wedge Document Discovery Institute, 1999.
•"[M]embers of the national ID movement insist that their attacks on evolution aren't religiously motivated, but, rather, scientiﬁc in nature. [...] Yet the express strategic objectives of the Discovery Institute; the writings, careers, and affiliations of ID's leading proponents; and the movement's funding sources all betray a clear moral and religious agenda". Inferior Design Chris Mooney. The American Prospect, August 10, 2005.

qca.org.uk

«How can we answer questions about creation and origins?» (PDF). Qualifications and Curriculum Authority for England. 2006. Consultado em 1 de outubro de 2007. Arquivado do original (PDF) em 10 de novembro de 2008

reason.com

Bailey, Ronald (julho de 1997). «Origin of the Specious». Reason. Consultado em 31 de março de 2008

reasons.org

Ross, Hugh. «More Than Intelligent Design». Facts for Faith. Reasons to Believe. Consultado em 21 de julho de 2007

religion-online.org

David C. Steinmetz (2005) "The Debate on Intelligent Design" in The Christian Century, (December, 27, 2005, pp. 27–31.)[1] Arquivado em 8 de janeiro de 2009, no Wayback Machine.

reuters.com

uk.reuters.com

«NCSE Resource—Council of Europe approves resolution against creationism». National Center for Science Education. 4 de outubro de 2007. Consultado em 5 de outubro de 2007
- «Council of Europe firmly opposes creationism in school». Reuters. Consultado em 5 de outubro de 2007

rr.com

home.kc.rr.com

"the writings of leading ID proponents reveal that the designer postulated by their argument is the God of Christianity". Kitzmiller v. Dover Area School District (2005), Ruling p. 26. A selection of writings and quotes of intelligent design supporters demonstrating this identification of the Christian God with the intelligent designer are found in the pdf Horse's Mouth Arquivado em 28 de outubro de 2008, no Wayback Machine. by Brian Poindexter, dated 2003.

rsternberg.net

Página pessoal do Dr. Richard Sternberg (em inglês)

sbg.org.br

«Ciência e Criacionismo» (PDF). Sociedade Brasileira de Genética. 2012. Consultado em 13 de fevereiro de 2016 Sítios eletrônicos: http://www.sbg.org.br/#!noticias/c8he | http://www.sbg.org.br

sbpcnet.com.br

Carta à Câmara dos Deputados - SBPC - 28 de novembro de 2014. Acessada no sítio http://www.sbpcnet.com.br/site/arquivos/arquivo_402.pdf às 21:55 horas UTC de 13 de fevereiro de 2016.

sciencemag.org

For example, Bridgham et al. showed that gradual evolutionary mechanisms can produce complex protein-protein interaction systems from simpler precursors. Bridgham; et al. (2006). «Evolution of Hormone-Receptor Complexity by Molecular Exploitation». Science. 312 (5770): 97–101. doi:10.1126/science.1123348
Enserink, Martin (3 de junho de 2005). «Evolution Politics: Is Holland Becoming the Kansas of Europe?». Science. 308 (5727). 1394 páginas. PMID 15933170. doi:10.1126/science.308.5727.1394b

science.sciencemag.org

Silva, Heslley Machado (1 de setembro de 2017). «Intelligent design endangers education». Science (em inglês). 357 (6354): 880–880. ISSN 0036-8075. PMID 28860376. doi:10.1126/science.aao3245

seedmagazine.com

Strange Bedfellows: Scientists and Christian clergy ally for science, but is it a bond made in heaven? Arquivado em 27 de julho de 2011, no Wayback Machine., Maggie Wittlin, Science & Religion, Seed Magazine, March 24, 2006

skeptic.com

Skeptic: eSkeptic: Thursday, April 17th, 2008
Provonsha, Matthew (21 de setembro de 2006). «Godless: The Church of Liberalism». eSkeptic. Consultado em 3 de setembro de 2007

smh.com.au

Coultan, Mark (27 de novembro de 2005). «Intelligent design a Trojan horse, says creationist». Sydney Morning Herald. Consultado em 29 de julho de 2007
Smith, Deborah (21 de outubro de 2005). «Intelligent design not science: experts». Sydney Morning Herald. Consultado em 13 de julho de 2007

space.com

Shostak, Seth (2005). «SETI and Intelligent Design». Space.com. Consultado em 18 de julho de 2007. In fact, the signals actually sought by today's SETI searches are not complex, as the ID advocates assume. [...] If SETI were to announce that we're not alone because it had detected a signal, it would be on the basis of artificiality

spectator.org

Sewell, Granville (28 de dezembro de 2005). «Evolution's Thermodynamic Failure». The American Spectator. Consultado em 16 de fevereiro de 2007 Also available from the Discovery Institute, retrieved on July 7, 2007.

stanford.edu

plato.stanford.edu

«Plato's Timaeus». The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. The Metaphysics Research Lab, Stanford University. 25 de outubro de 2005. Consultado em 22 de julho de 2007

stephenjaygould.org

Richard P. Aulie (1998). «A Reader's Guide to Of Pandas and People». National Association of Biology Teachers. Consultado em 5 de outubro de 2007. Arquivado do original em 6 de março de 2014

talkdesign.org

John S. Wilkins and Wesley R. Elsberry. Biology and Philosophy, 16: 711–724. 2001. The Advantages of Theft over Toil: The Design Inference and Arguing from Ignorance

talkorigins.org

"Q. Has the Discovery Institute been a leader in the intelligent design movement? A. Yes, the Discovery Institute's Center for Science and Culture. Q. And are almost all of the individuals who are involved with the intelligent design movement associated with the Discovery Institute? A. All of the leaders are, yes". Barbara Forrest, 2005, testifying in the Kitzmiller v. Dover Area School District trial. «Kitzmiller v. Dover Area School District Trial transcript: Day 6 (October 5), PM Session, Part 1.». The TalkOrigins Archive. 2005. Consultado em 19 de julho de 2007
• "The Discovery Institute is the ideological and strategic backbone behind the eruption of skirmishes over science in school districts and state capitals across the country". In: Wilgoren, J (21 de agosto de 2005). «Politicized Scholars Put Evolution on the Defensive» (PDF). The New York Times. Consultado em 19 de julho de 2007
• «Who is behind the ID movement?». Frequently Asked Questions About "Intelligent Design". American Civil Liberties Union. 16 de setembro de 2005. Consultado em 20 de julho de 2007
• Kahn, JP (27 de julho de 2005). «The Evolution of George Gilder. The Author And Tech-Sector Guru Has A New Cause To Create Controversy With: Intelligent Design». The Boston Globe. Consultado em 19 de julho de 2007
• «Who's Who of Intelligent Design Proponents». Science & Religion Guide. Science & Theology News. 2005. Consultado em 20 de julho de 2007 (PDF file from Discovery Institute).
• "The engine behind the ID movement is the Discovery Institute". Attie, Alan D.; Elliot Sober, Ronald L. Numbers, Richard M. Amasino, Beth Cox4, Terese Berceau, Thomas Powell and Michael M. Cox (2006). «Defending science education against intelligent design: a call to action». Journal of Clinical Investigation 116:1134–1138. doi:10.1172/JCI28449. A publication of the American Society for Clinical Investigation. Consultado em 20 de julho de 2007
Richard Wein (2002): "Not a Free Lunch But a Box of Chocolates: A critique of William Dembski's book No Free Lunch" [6]
Rich Baldwin, (2005). Information Theory and Creationism
«Entropy, Disorder and Life». TalkOrigins.org. Consultado em 17 de julho de 2007
Kitzmiller v. Dover Area School District, October 19, 2005, AM session Kitzmiller Testimony, Behe
Isaak, Mark (2006). «Index to Creationist Claims». The TalkOrigins Archive. With some of the claims for peer review, notably Campbell and Meyer (2003) and the e-journal PCID, the reviewers are themselves ardent supporters of intelligent design. The purpose of peer review is to expose errors, weaknesses, and significant omissions in fact and argument. That purpose is not served if the reviewers are uncritical

talkreason.com

See, e.g., Mark Perakh, "The Dream World of William Dembski's Creationism", in Skeptic Volume 11 (Number 4) 2005, 54–65. [12]

talkreason.org

Mark Perakh, (2005). Dembski "displaces Darwinism" mathematically -- or does he?
Richard Wein. 2002. Not a Free Lunch But a Box of Chocolates

teachernet.gov.uk

«Teachernet, Document bank». Creationism teaching guidance. UK Department for Children, Schools and Families. 18 de setembro de 2007. Consultado em 1 de outubro de 2007. The intelligent design movement claims there are aspects of the natural world that are so intricate and fit for purpose that they cannot have evolved but must have been created by an 'intelligent designer'. Furthermore they assert that this claim is scientifically testable and should therefore be taught in science lessons. Intelligent design lies wholly outside of science. Sometimes examples are quoted that are said to require an 'intelligent designer'. However, many of these have subsequently been shown to have a scientific explanation, for example, the immune system and blood clotting mechanisms.
Attempts to establish an idea of the 'specified complexity' needed for intelligent design are surrounded by complex mathematics. Despite this, the idea seems to be essentially a modern version of the old idea of the "God-of-the-gaps". Lack of a satisfactory scientific explanation of some phenomena (a 'gap' in scientific knowledge) is claimed to be evidence of an intelligent designer.

telicthoughts.com

'Evolution according to Hoyle: Survivors of disaster in an earlier world', By Nicholas Timmins, The Times, Wednesday, January 13, 1982; pg. 22; Issue 61130; col F. Hoyle stated in a 1982 speech: "...one arrives at the conclusion that biomaterials with their amazing measure or order must be the outcome of intelligent design". [2]

templeton.org

Giberson, Karl (5 de dezembro de 2005). Intelligent design's long march to nowhere. [S.l.]: Templeton Foundation, Science & Theology News [11] Arquivado em 10 de março de 2007, no Wayback Machine.

thelatinlibrary.com

Cicero, De Natura Deorum, Book I, 36–37, Latin Library.

touchstonemag.com

Dembski: "Intelligent design is just the Logos theology of John's Gospel restated in the idiom of information theory," Touchstone Magazine. Volume 12, Issue4: July/August, 1999
Phillip Johnson: "Our strategy has been to change the subject a bit so that we can get the issue of Intelligent Design, which really means the reality of God, before the academic world and into the schools." Johnson 2004. Christianity.ca. Let's Be Intelligent About Darwin Arquivado em 22 de agosto de 2007, no Wayback Machine.. "This isn't really, and never has been a debate about science. It's about religion and philosophy." Johnson 1996. World Magazine. Witnesses For The Prosecution. "So the question is: "How to win?" That's when I began to develop what you now see full-fledged in the "wedge" strategy: "Stick with the most important thing"—the mechanism and the building up of information. Get the Bible and the Book of Genesis out of the debate because you do not want to raise the so-called Bible-science dichotomy. Phrase the argument in such a way that you can get it heard in the secular academy and in a way that tends to unify the religious dissenters. That means concentrating on, "Do you need a Creator to do the creating, or can nature do it on its own?" and refusing to get sidetracked onto other issues, which people are always trying to do." Johnson 2000. Touchstone magazine. Berkeley's Radical An Interview with Phillip E. Johnson^{[ligação inativa]} at the Internet Archive

ucla.edu

today.ucla.edu

See, e.g., Joseph Manson, "Intelligent design is pseudoscience", UCLA Today Vol. 26. No.2 Sept. 27, 2005. [8] Arquivado em 13 de agosto de 2008, no Wayback Machine.; Rev Max, "The Incredibly Strange Story of Intelligent Design", New Dawn Magazine No. 97 (July–August 2006)

ucsd.edu

philosophyfaculty.ucsd.edu

Wüthrich, Christian (11 de janeiro de 2007). «Demarcating science vis-à-vis pseudoscience» (PDF). Department of Philosophy. University of California at San Diego. Consultado em 19 de julho de 2007. Arquivado do original (PDF) em 1 de dezembro de 2007

udel.edu

John H. McDonald's "reducibly complex mousetrap"

ufcg.edu.br

MEC diz que criacionismo não é tema para aula de ciências - Universidade Federal de Campina Grande - Assessoria de Imprensa - Sítio eletrônico: http://www.ufcg.edu.br/prt_ufcg/assessoria_imprensa/mostra_noticia.php?codigo=8164 acessado às 22:10 horas UTC de 13 de fevereiro de 2016

ugent.be

biblio.ugent.be

Boudry, Maarten; Blancke, Stefaan; Braeckman, Johan (Dezembro de 2010). «Irreducible Incoherence and Intelligent Design: A Look into the Conceptual Toolbox of a Pseudoscience». Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press. The Quarterly Review of Biology. 85 (4): 473–482. PMID 21243965. doi:10.1086/656904 Article available from Universiteit Gent

umt.edu

«Articles: Editor's Note: Intelligent Design Articles» (PDF). University of Montana Law Review. 68 (1). 10 de abril de 2007. Consultado em 16 de outubro de 2008. Arquivado do original (PDF) em 27 de setembro de 2007
DeWolf, David K; West, Johng G; Luskin, Casey (4 de maio de 2007). «Intelligent Design Will Survive Kitzmiller v. Dover» (PDF). University of Montana Law Review. 68 (1). Consultado em 2 de janeiro de 2008. Arquivado do original (PDF) em 1 de dezembro de 2007
Irons, Peter (27 de abril de 2007). «Disaster In Dover: The Trials (And Tribulations) Of Intelligent Design» (PDF). University of Montana Law Review. 68 (1). Consultado em 16 de outubro de 2008. Arquivado do original (PDF) em 1 de dezembro de 2007
DeWolf, David K; West, John G; Luskin, Casey (27 de abril de 2007). «Rebuttal to Irons» (PDF). University of Montana Law Review. 68 (1). Consultado em 16 de outubro de 2008. Arquivado do original (PDF) em 1 de dezembro de 2007

uncommondescent.com

"If I ever became the president of a university (per impossibile), I would dissolve the biology department and divide the faculty with tenure that I couldn't get rid of into two new departments: those who know engineering and how it applies to biological systems would be assigned to the new "Department of Biological Engineering"; the rest, and that includes the evolutionists, would be consigned to the new "Department of Nature Appreciation" (didn't Darwin think of himself as a naturalist?)". "Truly Programmable Matter", William Dembski, 10 January 2007 published at Uncommon Descent. Downloaded 24 May 2007.
•"Demonstrative charts introduced through Dr. Forrest show parallel arguments relating to the rejection of naturalism, evolution's threat to culture and society, 'abrupt appearance' implying divine creation, the exploitation of the same alleged gaps in the fossil record, the alleged inability of science to explain complex biological information like DNA, as well as the theme that proponents of each version of creationism merely aim to teach a scientific alternative to evolution to show its 'strengths and weaknesses,' and to alert students to a supposed 'controversy' in the scientific community". Kitzmiller v. Dover Area School District, Decision, p. 34 (emphasis added)
•"Additionally, [leading intelligent design advocate] Dembski agrees that science is ruled by methodological naturalism and argues that this rule must be overturned if ID is to prosper". Kitzmiller v. Dover Area School District, Decision, p. 30.
•"Intelligent Design [...] supposes that the origins of living things require supernatural interventions to create the intricate, design-like, living forms that we see all around us". "Natural selection vs. intelligent design" From: USA Today (Magazine) January 1, 2004 Author: Ruse, Michael.

uol.com.br

www1.folha.uol.com.br

«Universidade Mackenzie de SP abre centro que questiona a evolução». Folha de S.Paulo

darwinedeus.blogfolha.uol.com.br

«Um apelo ao Mackenzie - Darwin e Deus». Darwin e Deus - Folha de S.Paulo - Blogs. Consultado em 16 de maio de 2017

uscourts.gov

pamd.uscourts.gov

«Tammy Kitzmiller, et al. v. Dover Area School District, et al.» (PDF). Consultado em 28 de setembro de 2005. Arquivado do original (PDF) em 28 de setembro de 2005

utexas.edu

See, for instance: Vuletic, Mark I. (1997). «Methodological Naturalism and the Supernatural». Naturalism, Theism and the Scientific Enterprise: An Interdisciplinary Conference. University of Texas, Austin. Consultado em 27 de julho de 2007. Arquivado do original em 14 de janeiro de 2008

web.archive.org

«Science and Policy: Intelligent Design and Peer Review». American Association for the Advancement of Science. 2007. Consultado em 19 de julho de 2007. Arquivado do original em 6 de junho de 2012
"the writings of leading ID proponents reveal that the designer postulated by their argument is the God of Christianity". Kitzmiller v. Dover Area School District (2005), Ruling p. 26. A selection of writings and quotes of intelligent design supporters demonstrating this identification of the Christian God with the intelligent designer are found in the pdf Horse's Mouth Arquivado em 28 de outubro de 2008, no Wayback Machine. by Brian Poindexter, dated 2003.
William A. Dembski, when asked in an interview whether his research concluded that God is the Intelligent Designer, stated "I believe God created the world for a purpose. The Designer of intelligent design is, ultimately, the Christian God". Devon Williams (14 de dezembro de 2007). «CitizenLink: Friday Five: William A. Dembski». Focus on the Family, a California non profit religious corporation. Consultado em 15 de dezembro de 2007. Arquivado do original em 17 de dezembro de 2007
José Lopes, Reinaldo (11 de julho de 2016). «Sai o manifesto do Design Inteligente | Darwin e Deus». Folha de S.Paulo. Consultado em 6 de junho de 2017
See: 1) List of scientific societies rejecting intelligent design 2) Kitzmiller v. Dover page 83. 3) The Discovery Institute's A Scientific Dissent From Darwinism petition begun in 2001 has been signed by "over 700 scientists" as of August 20, 2006. A four day A Scientific Support for Darwinism petition gained 7733 signatories from scientists opposing ID. The AAAS, the largest association of scientists in the U.S., has 120,000 members, and firmly rejects ID. More than 70,000 Australian scientists and educators condemn teaching of intelligent design in school science classes List of statements from scientific professional organizations Arquivado em 28 de março de 2008, no Wayback Machine. on the status intelligent design and other forms of creationism. According to The New York Times "There is no credible scientific challenge to the theory of evolution as an explanation for the complexity and diversity of life on earth". Dean, Cordelia (27 de setembro de 2007). «Scientists Feel Miscast in Film on Life's Origin». The New York Times. Consultado em 28 de setembro de 2007
National Science Teachers Association, a professional association of 55,000 science teachers and administrators in a 2005 press release: "We stand with the nation's leading scientific organizations and scientists, including Dr. John Marburger, the president's top science advisor, in stating that intelligent design is not science. ...It is simply not fair to present pseudoscience to students in the science classroom". National Science Teachers Association Disappointed About Intelligent Design Comments Made by President Bush National Science Teachers Association Press Release August 3, 2005.
• "for most members of the mainstream scientific community, ID is not a scientific theory, but a creationist pseudoscience". Trojan Horse or Legitimate Science: Deconstructing the Debate over Intelligent Design Arquivado em 24 de julho de 2007, no Wayback Machine. David Mu. Harvard Science Review, Volume 19, Issue 1, Fall 2005.
• "Creationists are repackaging their message as the pseudoscience of intelligent design theory". Professional Ethics Report Arquivado em 3 de janeiro de 2011, no Wayback Machine. American Association for the Advancement of Science, 2001.
"ID fails on three different levels, any one of which is sufficient to preclude a determination that ID is science. They are: (1) ID violates the centuries-old ground rules of science by invoking and permitting supernatural causation; (2) the argument of irreducible complexity, central to ID, employs the same flawed and illogical contrived dualism that doomed creation science in the 1980s; and (3) ID's negative attacks on evolution have been refuted by the scientific community" Kitzmiller v. Dover Area School District (2005), Ruling, page 64 ff
• "Broom shows conclusively that intelligent design's opposition to Darwinism rests primarily on scientific grounds". William Dembski, in the forward of How Blind is the Watchmaker? Nature's Design and the Limits of Naturalistic Science Arquivado em 10 de junho de 2008, no Wayback Machine.. Neil Broom. 2001
"ID's rejection of naturalism in any form logically entails its appeal to the only alternative, supernaturalism, as a putatively scientific explanation for natural phenomena. This makes ID a religious belief". Expert Witness Report Arquivado em 10 de julho de 2007, no Wayback Machine. Barbara Forrest Kitzmiller v. Dover Area School District, April, 2005.
"...the ID movement has not proposed a scientific means of testing its claims..." AAAS Board Resolution on Intelligent Design Theory Arquivado em 28 de março de 2008, no Wayback Machine. American Association for the Advancement of Science, 2002.
Thomas Aquinas, Summa Theologiae. "Thomas Aquinas' 'Five Ways' (archive link)" in faithnet.org.uk.
David C. Steinmetz (2005) "The Debate on Intelligent Design" in The Christian Century, (December, 27, 2005, pp. 27–31.)[1] Arquivado em 8 de janeiro de 2009, no Wayback Machine.
Charles B. Thaxton, Ph.D. (13–16 de novembro de 1986). «DNA, Design and the Origin of Life». Christian Leadership Ministries. Consultado em 10 de outubro de 2007. Arquivado do original em 27 de setembro de 2007
Phillip Johnson: "Our strategy has been to change the subject a bit so that we can get the issue of Intelligent Design, which really means the reality of God, before the academic world and into the schools." Johnson 2004. Christianity.ca. Let's Be Intelligent About Darwin Arquivado em 22 de agosto de 2007, no Wayback Machine.. "This isn't really, and never has been a debate about science. It's about religion and philosophy." Johnson 1996. World Magazine. Witnesses For The Prosecution. "So the question is: "How to win?" That's when I began to develop what you now see full-fledged in the "wedge" strategy: "Stick with the most important thing"—the mechanism and the building up of information. Get the Bible and the Book of Genesis out of the debate because you do not want to raise the so-called Bible-science dichotomy. Phrase the argument in such a way that you can get it heard in the secular academy and in a way that tends to unify the religious dissenters. That means concentrating on, "Do you need a Creator to do the creating, or can nature do it on its own?" and refusing to get sidetracked onto other issues, which people are always trying to do." Johnson 2000. Touchstone magazine. Berkeley's Radical An Interview with Phillip E. Johnson^{[ligação inativa]} at the Internet Archive
Stephen C. Meyer: "I think the designer is God..." (Darwin, the marketing of Intelligent Design . Nightline ABC News, with Ted Koppel, August 10, 2005); Nancy Pearcey: "By contrast, design theory demonstrates that Christians can sit in the supernaturalist’s “chair” even in their professional lives, seeing the cosmos through the lens of a comprehensive biblical worldview. Intelligent Design steps boldly into the scientific arena to build a case based on empirical data. It takes Christianity out of the ineffectual realm of value and stakes out a cognitive claim in the realm of objective truth. It restores Christianity to its status as genuine knowledge, equipping us to defend it in the public arena". (Total Truth, Crossway Books, June 29, 2004, ISBN 1581344589, pp. 204-205)
Letter 3154—Darwin, C. R. to Herschel, J. F. W., 23 May 1861 Arquivado em 6 de janeiro de 2009, no Wayback Machine., Charles Darwin, Darwin Correspondence Project, Letter 3154, May 23, 1861.
Jonathan Witt (20 de dezembro de 2005). «Evolution News & Views: Dover Judge Regurgitates Mythological History of Intelligent Design». Discovery Institute. Consultado em 5 de outubro de 2007. Arquivado do original em 18 de novembro de 2007
Nick Matzke (2006). «NCSE Resource -- 9.0. Matzke (2006): The Story of the Pandas Drafts». National Center for Science Education. Consultado em 14 de novembro de 2007
*Nick Matzke (2006). «Missing Link discovered!». National Center for Science Education. Consultado em 14 de novembro de 2007. Arquivado do original em 14 de janeiro de 2007
Richard P. Aulie (1998). «A Reader's Guide to Of Pandas and People». National Association of Biology Teachers. Consultado em 5 de outubro de 2007. Arquivado do original em 6 de março de 2014
Nick Matzke; Jon Buell (13 de outubro de 2005). «I guess ID really was "Creationism's Trojan Horse" after all». The Panda's Thumb. Consultado em 5 de outubro de 2007. Arquivado do original em 24 de junho de 2008 , links to Wayback Machine for pdf.
Behe, Michael (1997): Molecular Machines: Experimental Support for the Design Inference [3] Arquivado em 26 de janeiro de 2008, no Wayback Machine.
Irreducible complexity of these examples is disputed; see Kitzmiller, pp. 76–78, and Ken Miller Webcast Arquivado em 13 de junho de 2006, no Wayback Machine.
David Ussery, "A Biochemist's Response to 'The Biochemical Challenge to Evolution' Arquivado em 22 de outubro de 2004, no Wayback Machine."
Branden Fitelson, Christopher Stephens, Elliott Sober. Cambridge University Press. 1998 How Not to Detect Design: A review of William A. Dembski's The Design Inference—Eliminating Chance Through Small Probabilities Arquivado em 25 de fevereiro de 2009, no Wayback Machine.
Jason Rosenhouse, (2001). How Anti-Evolutionists Abuse Mathematics Arquivado em 16 de maio de 2005, no Wayback Machine. The Mathematical Intelligencer, Vol. 23, No. 4, Fall 2001, pp. 3-8.
«Cópia arquivada». Consultado em 2 de março de 2011. Arquivado do original em 9 de março de 2011
The Panda's Thumb. review of The Privileged Planet Arquivado em 25 de janeiro de 2008, no Wayback Machine.
Is The Universe Fine-Tuned For Us? Arquivado em 16 de julho de 2012, no Wayback Machine. Victor J. Stenger. University of Colorado. (PDF file)
Evidence For Design In The Universe Arquivado em 14 de abril de 2010, no Wayback Machine. por Hugh Ross, Ph.D. in Astronomy - ver comentários ao final da tabela.
Dembski. The Act of Creation: Bridging Transcendence and Immanence Arquivado em 25 de janeiro de 2007, no Wayback Machine.
Dr. Donald E. Simanek. Intelligent Design: The Glass is Empty Arquivado em 14 de julho de 2012, no Wayback Machine.
See, e.g., Joseph Manson, "Intelligent design is pseudoscience", UCLA Today Vol. 26. No.2 Sept. 27, 2005. [8] Arquivado em 13 de agosto de 2008, no Wayback Machine.; Rev Max, "The Incredibly Strange Story of Intelligent Design", New Dawn Magazine No. 97 (July–August 2006)
"for most members of the mainstream scientific community, ID is not a scientific theory, but a creationist pseudoscience". Trojan Horse or Legitimate Science: Deconstructing the Debate over Intelligent Design Arquivado em 24 de julho de 2007, no Wayback Machine., David Mu, Harvard Science Review, Volume 19, Issue 1, Fall 2005.
• "Creationists are repackaging their message as the pseudoscience of intelligent design theory". Professional Ethics Report Arquivado em 3 de janeiro de 2011, no Wayback Machine., American Association for the Advancement of Science, 2001.
• Conclusion of Kitzmiller v. Dover Area School District Ruling
"Dembski chides me for never using the term "intelligent design" without conjoining it to "creationism". He implies (though never explicitly asserts) that he and others in his movement are not creationists and that it is incorrect to discuss them in such terms, suggesting that doing so is merely a rhetorical ploy to "rally the troops". (2) Am I (and the many others who see Dembski's movement in the same way) misrepresenting their position? The basic notion of creationism is the rejection of biological evolution in favor of special creation, where the latter is understood to be supernatural. Beyond this there is considerable variability...", from Wizards of ID: Reply to Dembski Arquivado em 20 de dezembro de 2008, no Wayback Machine., Robert T. Pennock, p. 645–667 of Intelligent Design Creationism and Its Critics: Philosophical, Theological, and Scientific Perspectives, Robert T. Pennock (editor), Cambridge, MIT Press, 2001, 825 p., ISBN 0262661241; Pennock, R.T., 1999, Tower of Babel: Evidence Against the New Creationism, Cambridge, MIT Press, 440 p.
The Creation/Evolution Continuum Arquivado em 9 de maio de 2008, no Wayback Machine., Eugenie Scott, National Center for Science Education Reports, v. 19, n. 4, p. 16–17, 23–25, July/August, 1999.; Scott, E.C., 2004, Evolution vs. Creationism: An Introduction, Westport, Greenwood Press, 296p, ISBN 0520246500
"I have built an intellectual movement in the universities and churches that we call The Wedge, which is devoted to scholarship and writing that furthers this program of questioning the materialistic basis of science. [...] Now the way that I see the logic of our movement going is like this. The first thing you understand is that the Darwinian theory isn't true. It's falsified by all of the evidence and the logic is terrible. When you realize that, the next question that occurs to you is, well, where might you get the truth? [...] I start with John 1:1. In the beginning was the word. In the beginning was intelligence, purpose, and wisdom. The Bible had that right. And the materialist scientists are deluding themselves." Johnson 1999. Reclaiming America for Christ Conference. How the Evolution Debate Can Be Won Arquivado em 7 de novembro de 2007, no Wayback Machine.
Discovery Institute fellows and staff. [9] Arquivado em 14 de julho de 2004, no Wayback Machine. Center for Science and Culture fellows and staff. [10] Arquivado em 9 de fevereiro de 2014, no Wayback Machine.
«Nearly Two-thirds of U.S. Adults Believe Human Beings Were Created by God». The Harris Poll #52. Harris Interactive. 6 de julho de 2005. Consultado em 13 de julho de 2007. Arquivado do original em 17 de dezembro de 2005
Mooney, Chris (11 de setembro de 2003). «Polling for ID». Doubt and About. Committee for Skeptical Inquiry. Consultado em 16 de fevereiro de 2007. Arquivado do original em 27 de março de 2008
«'Intelligent Design'-ers launch new assault on curriculum using lies and deception David Harris' Science & Literature. News and commentary on science, literature, journalism and their intersection». Salon.com
According to the poll, 18% of the physicians believed that God created humans exactly as they appear today. Another 42% believed that God initiated and guided an evolutionary process that has led to current human beings. The poll also found that "an overwhelming majority of Jewish doctors (83%) and half of Catholic doctors (51%) believe that intelligent design is simply "a religiously inspired pseudo-science rather than a legitimate scientific speculation". The poll also found that "more than half of Protestant doctors (63%) believe that intelligent design is a "legitimate scientific speculation".
«Majority of Physicians Give the Nod to Evolution Over Intelligent Design». Consultado em 8 de outubro de 2007. Arquivado do original em 23 de julho de 2011
Strange Bedfellows: Scientists and Christian clergy ally for science, but is it a bond made in heaven? Arquivado em 27 de julho de 2011, no Wayback Machine., Maggie Wittlin, Science & Religion, Seed Magazine, March 24, 2006
«NABT's Statement on Teaching Evolution». National Association of Biology Teachers. Consultado em 9 de março de 2014. Arquivado do original em 27 de setembro de 2006
«IAP Statement on the Teaching of Evolution» (PDF). The Interacademy Panel on International Issues. 21 de junho de 2006. Consultado em 17 de outubro de 2008. Arquivado do original (PDF) em 27 de setembro de 2007 Joint statement issued by the national science academies of 67 countries, including the United Kingdom's Royal Society.
See, for instance: Vuletic, Mark I. (1997). «Methodological Naturalism and the Supernatural». Naturalism, Theism and the Scientific Enterprise: An Interdisciplinary Conference. University of Texas, Austin. Consultado em 27 de julho de 2007. Arquivado do original em 14 de janeiro de 2008
Nickson, Elizabeth (10 de janeiro de 2003). «Let's Be Intelligent About Darwin». Christianity.ca. The Evangelical Fellowship of Canada. Consultado em 23 de julho de 2007. Arquivado do original em 22 de agosto de 2007. [Phillip E. Johnson quoted]: Our strategy has been to change the subject a bit so that we can get the issue of Intelligent Design, which really means the reality of God, before the academic world and into the schools.
Giberson, Karl (5 de dezembro de 2005). Intelligent design's long march to nowhere. [S.l.]: Templeton Foundation, Science & Theology News [11] Arquivado em 10 de março de 2007, no Wayback Machine.
Intelligent Design Arquivado em 25 de outubro de 2008, no Wayback Machine., Expelled Exposed, National Center for Science Education
Murray, Michael J. «Natural Providence (or Design Trouble)» (PDF). Franklin & Marshall College. Consultado em 23 de julho de 2007. Arquivado do original (PDF) em 20 de agosto de 2006
Scott, Eugenie C. (7 de dezembro de 2000). «The Creation/Evolution Continuum». National Center for Science Education. Consultado em 22 de julho de 2007. Arquivado do original em 14 de julho de 2007
Resseger, Jan (Chair) (2006). «Science, Religion, and the Teaching of Evolution in Public School Science Classes» (PDF). Committee on Public Education and Literacy. National Council of Churches. Consultado em 17 de julho de 2007. Arquivado do original (PDF) em 11 de julho de 2007
Wüthrich, Christian (11 de janeiro de 2007). «Demarcating science vis-à-vis pseudoscience» (PDF). Department of Philosophy. University of California at San Diego. Consultado em 19 de julho de 2007. Arquivado do original (PDF) em 1 de dezembro de 2007
See, e.g., Jill E. Schneider (Dept. of Biological Sciences, Lehigh University, 2005) "Thoughts on Evolution and Intelligent Design" [13] Arquivado em 2 de setembro de 2006, no Wayback Machine. "Q: Why couldn't intelligent design also be a scientific theory? A : The idea of intelligent design might or might not be true, but when presented as a scientific hypothesis, it is not useful because it is based on weak assumptions, lacks supporting data and terminates further thought".
«Nobel Laureates Initiative» (PDF). The Elie Wiesel Foundation for Humanity. 9 de setembro de 2005. Consultado em 19 de julho de 2007. Arquivado do original (PDF) em 7 de outubro de 2005 The September 2005 statement by 38 Nobel laureates stated that: "Intelligent design is fundamentally unscientific; it cannot be tested as scientific theory because its central conclusion is based on belief in the intervention of a supernatural agent".
«Intelligent Design is not Science: Scientists and teachers speak out». University of New South Wales. 2005. Consultado em 9 de janeiro de 2009 The October 2005 statement, by a coalition representing more than 70,000 Australian scientists and science teachers said: "intelligent design is not science" and called on "all schools not to teach Intelligent Design (ID) as science, because it fails to qualify on every count as a scientific theory".
Brauer, Matthew J.; Forrest, Barbara; Gey Steven G. (2005). «Is It Science Yet?: Intelligent Design Creationism and the Constitution» (PDF). Washington University Law Quarterly. 83 (1). Consultado em 18 de julho de 2007. Arquivado do original (PDF) em 10 de outubro de 2006. ID leaders know the benefits of submitting their work to independent review and have established at least two purportedly "peer-reviewed" journals for ID articles. However, one has languished for want of material and quietly ceased publication, while the other has a more overtly philosophical orientation. Both journals employ a weak standard of "peer review" that amounts to no more than vetting by the editorial board or society fellows.
Edis, Taner (2001). «Darwin in Mind: Intelligent Design Meets Artificial Intelligence». Skeptical Inquirer Magazine. Consultado em 17 de julho de 2007. Arquivado do original em 15 de agosto de 2009
«Tammy Kitzmiller, et al. v. Dover Area School District, et al.» (PDF). Consultado em 28 de setembro de 2005. Arquivado do original (PDF) em 28 de setembro de 2005
«Articles: Editor's Note: Intelligent Design Articles» (PDF). University of Montana Law Review. 68 (1). 10 de abril de 2007. Consultado em 16 de outubro de 2008. Arquivado do original (PDF) em 27 de setembro de 2007
DeWolf, David K; West, Johng G; Luskin, Casey (4 de maio de 2007). «Intelligent Design Will Survive Kitzmiller v. Dover» (PDF). University of Montana Law Review. 68 (1). Consultado em 2 de janeiro de 2008. Arquivado do original (PDF) em 1 de dezembro de 2007
Irons, Peter (27 de abril de 2007). «Disaster In Dover: The Trials (And Tribulations) Of Intelligent Design» (PDF). University of Montana Law Review. 68 (1). Consultado em 16 de outubro de 2008. Arquivado do original (PDF) em 1 de dezembro de 2007
DeWolf, David K; West, John G; Luskin, Casey (27 de abril de 2007). «Rebuttal to Irons» (PDF). University of Montana Law Review. 68 (1). Consultado em 16 de outubro de 2008. Arquivado do original (PDF) em 1 de dezembro de 2007
«WIRED Magazine response». Illustra Media. Consultado em 13 de julho de 2007. Arquivado do original em 20 de dezembro de 2008. It's also important that you read a well developed rebuttal to Wired's misleading accusations. Links to both the article and a response by the Discovery Institute (our partners in the production of Unlocking the Mystery of Life and The Privileged Planet)
«How can we answer questions about creation and origins?» (PDF). Qualifications and Curriculum Authority for England. 2006. Consultado em 1 de outubro de 2007. Arquivado do original (PDF) em 10 de novembro de 2008
«NoCreSciEd - epetition reply». Her Majesty's Stationery Office. 21 de junho de 2007. Consultado em 13 de julho de 2007. Arquivado do original em 2 de junho de 2008
Lengagne, Guy (8 de junho de 2007). «The dangers of creationism in education». Committee on Culture, Science and Education, Socialist Group, Parliamentary Assembly. Council of Europe, Doc. 11297. Consultado em 17 de outubro de 2008. Arquivado do original em 13 de agosto de 2007

webcitation.org

«The dangers of creationism in education». Council of Europe. Consultado em 3 de agosto de 2007. Arquivado do original em 17 de março de 2012

wikipedia.org

en.wikipedia.org

Schönborn, Cardinal Christoph (2 de outubro de 2005). «Catechetical Lecture at St. Stephan's Cathedral, Vienna» (Reprint). Bring You To. Consultado em 22 de julho de 2007. Purpose and design in the natural world, [has] no difficulty [...] with the theory of evolution [within] the borders of scientific theory.

wikisource.org

pt.wikisource.org

Kitzmiller v. Dover Area School District (2005), Context pg. 32 ff, citing Edwards v. Aguillard.
"ID is not a new scientific argument, but is rather an old religious argument for the existence of God. He traced this argument back to at least Thomas Aquinas in the 13th century, who framed the argument as a syllogism: Wherever complex design exists, there must have been a designer; nature is complex; therefore nature must have had an intelligent designer." "This argument for the existence of God was advanced early in the 19th century by Reverend Paley" (the teleological argument) "The only apparent difference between the argument made by Paley and the argument for ID, as expressed by defense expert witnesses Behe and Minnich, is that ID's 'official position' does not acknowledge that the designer is God." Kitzmiller v. Dover Area School District (2005), Ruling, p. 24.
"the writings of leading ID proponents reveal that the designer postulated by their argument is the God of Christianity". Kitzmiller v. Dover Area School District (2005), Ruling p. 26. A selection of writings and quotes of intelligent design supporters demonstrating this identification of the Christian God with the intelligent designer are found in the pdf Horse's Mouth Arquivado em 28 de outubro de 2008, no Wayback Machine. by Brian Poindexter, dated 2003.
Stephen C. Meyer and Paul A. Nelson, May 1, 1996, CSC – Getting Rid of the Unfair Rules, A book review, Origins & Design, Retrieved 2007-05-20,
• Phillip E. Johnson, August 31, 1996, Starting a Conversation about Evolution, Access Research Network Phillip Johnson Files, Retrieved 2007-05-20,
• Stephen C. Meyer, December 1, 2002, Ignatius Press. The Scientific Status of Intelligent Design: The Methodological Equivalence of Naturalistic and Non-Naturalistic Origins Theories,
• Kitzmiller v. Dover Area School District (2005), Whether ID Is Science,
• Kitzmiller v. Dover Area School District (2005), Lead defense expert Professor Behe admitted that his broadened definition of science, which encompasses ID, would also include astrology.
• See also Evolution of Kansas science standards continues as Darwin's theories regain prominence International Herald Tribune, February 13, 2007, Retrieved 2007-05-20.
See: 1) List of scientific societies rejecting intelligent design 2) Kitzmiller v. Dover page 83. 3) The Discovery Institute's A Scientific Dissent From Darwinism petition begun in 2001 has been signed by "over 700 scientists" as of August 20, 2006. A four day A Scientific Support for Darwinism petition gained 7733 signatories from scientists opposing ID. The AAAS, the largest association of scientists in the U.S., has 120,000 members, and firmly rejects ID. More than 70,000 Australian scientists and educators condemn teaching of intelligent design in school science classes List of statements from scientific professional organizations Arquivado em 28 de março de 2008, no Wayback Machine. on the status intelligent design and other forms of creationism. According to The New York Times "There is no credible scientific challenge to the theory of evolution as an explanation for the complexity and diversity of life on earth". Dean, Cordelia (27 de setembro de 2007). «Scientists Feel Miscast in Film on Life's Origin». The New York Times. Consultado em 28 de setembro de 2007
Kitzmiller v. Dover Area School District, 04 cv 2688 (December 20, 2005), 4: whether ID is science. The ruling discusses central aspects of expectations in the scientific community that a scientific theory be testable, dynamic, correctible, progressive, based upon multiple observations, and provisional,
The designer is not falsifiable, since its existence is typically asserted without sufficient conditions to allow a falsifying observation. The designer being beyond the realm of the observable, claims about its existence can be neither supported nor undermined by observation, making intelligent design and the argument from design analytic a posteriori arguments. See, e.g., Kitzmiller v. Dover Area School District, 04 cv 2688 (December 20, 2005). Ruling, p. 22 and p. 77.
That intelligent design is not empirically testable stems from the fact that it violates a basic premise of science, naturalism. See, e.g., Kitzmiller v. Dover Area School District, 04 cv 2688 (December 20, 2005). Ruling, p. 22 and p. 66.
Intelligent design professes to offer an answer that does not need to be defined or explained, the intelligent agent, designer. By asserting a conclusion that cannot be accounted for scientifically, the designer, intelligent design cannot be sustained by any further explanation, and objections raised to those who accept intelligent design make little headway. Thus intelligent design is not a provisional assessment of data which can change when new information is discovered. Once it is claimed that a conclusion that need not be accounted for has been established, there is simply no possibility of future correction. The idea of the progressive growth of scientific ideas is required to explain previous data and any previously unexplainable data. See, e.g., the brief explanation in Kitzmiller v. Dover Area School District, 04 cv 2688 (December 20, 2005). p. 66.
Kitzmiller v. Dover Area School District, 04 cv 2688 (December 20, 2005). 4. Whether ID is Science, p. 87

en.wikisource.org

"ID fails on three different levels, any one of which is sufficient to preclude a determination that ID is science. They are: (1) ID violates the centuries-old ground rules of science by invoking and permitting supernatural causation; (2) the argument of irreducible complexity, central to ID, employs the same flawed and illogical contrived dualism that doomed creation science in the 1980s; and (3) ID's negative attacks on evolution have been refuted by the scientific community" Kitzmiller v. Dover Area School District (2005), Ruling, page 64 ff
• "Broom shows conclusively that intelligent design's opposition to Darwinism rests primarily on scientific grounds". William Dembski, in the forward of How Blind is the Watchmaker? Nature's Design and the Limits of Naturalistic Science Arquivado em 10 de junho de 2008, no Wayback Machine.. Neil Broom. 2001
Kitzmiller v. Dover Area School District (2005), p. 70.
Kitzmiller v. Dover Area School District (2005) 4: whether ID is science
"for most members of the mainstream scientific community, ID is not a scientific theory, but a creationist pseudoscience". Trojan Horse or Legitimate Science: Deconstructing the Debate over Intelligent Design Arquivado em 24 de julho de 2007, no Wayback Machine., David Mu, Harvard Science Review, Volume 19, Issue 1, Fall 2005.
• "Creationists are repackaging their message as the pseudoscience of intelligent design theory". Professional Ethics Report Arquivado em 3 de janeiro de 2011, no Wayback Machine., American Association for the Advancement of Science, 2001.
• Conclusion of Kitzmiller v. Dover Area School District Ruling
Ruling, Kitzmiller v. Dover Area School District 4: whether ID is science
"For human artifacts, we know the designer's identity, human, and the mechanism of design, as we have experience based upon empirical evidence that humans can make such things, as well as many other attributes including the designer's abilities, needs, and desires. With ID, proponents assert that they refuse to propose hypotheses on the designer's identity, do not propose a mechanism, and the designer, he/she/it/they, has never been seen. In that vein, defense expert Professor Minnich agreed that in the case of human artifacts and objects, we know the identity and capacities of the human designer, but we do not know any of those attributes for the designer of biological life. In addition, Professor Behe agreed that for the design of human artifacts, we know the designer and its attributes and we have a baseline for human design that does not exist for design of biological systems. Professor Behe's only response to these seemingly insurmountable points of disanalogy was that the inference still works in science fiction movies".— Kitzmiller v. Dover Area School District, 04 cv 2688 (December 20, 2005)., p. 81

wisc.edu

philosophy.wisc.edu

Branden Fitelson, Christopher Stephens, Elliott Sober. Cambridge University Press. 1998 How Not to Detect Design: A review of William A. Dembski's The Design Inference—Eliminating Chance Through Small Probabilities Arquivado em 25 de fevereiro de 2009, no Wayback Machine.

wix.com

media.wix.com

«Ciência e Criacionismo» (PDF). Sociedade Brasileira de Genética. 2012. Consultado em 13 de fevereiro de 2016 Sítios eletrônicos: http://www.sbg.org.br/#!noticias/c8he | http://www.sbg.org.br

worldcat.org

Finnigan, Gregory C.; Victor (19 de janeiro de 2012). «Evolution of increased complexity in a molecular machine». Nature (em inglês). 481 (7381): 360-364. ISSN 0028-0836. PMID 22230956. doi:10.1038/nature10724
Del Bem, Luiz EV; Michel GA Vincentz (5 de novembro de 2010). «Evolution of xyloglucan-related genes in green plants». BMC Evolutionary Biology (em inglês). 10 (1). 341 páginas. ISSN 1471-2148. PMID 21054875. doi:10.1186/1471-2148-10-341
Silva, Heslley Machado (1 de setembro de 2017). «Intelligent design endangers education». Science (em inglês). 357 (6354): 880–880. ISSN 0036-8075. PMID 28860376. doi:10.1126/science.aao3245

wustl.edu

law.wustl.edu

Brauer, Matthew J.; Forrest, Barbara; Gey Steven G. (2005). «Is It Science Yet?: Intelligent Design Creationism and the Constitution» (PDF). Washington University Law Quarterly. 83 (1). Consultado em 18 de julho de 2007. Arquivado do original (PDF) em 10 de outubro de 2006. ID leaders know the benefits of submitting their work to independent review and have established at least two purportedly "peer-reviewed" journals for ID articles. However, one has languished for want of material and quietly ceased publication, while the other has a more overtly philosophical orientation. Both journals employ a weak standard of "peer review" that amounts to no more than vetting by the editorial board or society fellows.