Joined: Oct. 2006
I can't judge whether or not this guy's ideas will ever contribute to our understanding of the history of life, but it's clear to me that he is not promoting ID.
He says up front that he is using "design" to mean "configuration, pattern, geometry." He's not talking about purpose. In other words, he is using "design" the way it is used in engineering, not the way it is used in ID.
The UD'ers will have to blatantly equivocate on the word "design" to argue that this guy's work is pro-ID. Which, of course, is exactly what they will do.
Invoking intelligent design in science is like invoking gremlins in engineering. [after Mark Isaak.]
All models are wrong, some models are useful. - George E. P. Box