Signature in the Cell: DNA and the Evidence for Intelligent Design |  | Author: Stephen C. Meyer
Publisher: HarperOne
List Price: $28.99
Buy New: $15.71
as of 11/8/2009 04:58 CST details
You Save: $13.28 (46%)
New (31) Used (14) from $15.71
Seller: ---greatbookdeals
Rating:  83 reviews
Sales Rank: 1526
Media: Hardcover
Pages: 624
Number Of Items: 1
Shipping Weight (lbs): 2
Dimensions (in): 8.9 x 6.3 x 2
ISBN: 0061472786
Dewey Decimal Number: 113.8
EAN: 9780061472787
ASIN: 0061472786
Publication Date: June 23, 2009
Availability: Usually ships in 1-2 business days
| |
| Features:
|
| Also Available In:
|
| Similar Items:
| |
| Editorial Reviews:
Product Description
One hundred fifty years ago, Charles Darwin revolutionized biology, but did he refute intelligent design (ID)? In Signature in the Cell, Stephen Meyer argues that he did not. Much confusion surrounds the theory of intelligent design. Frequently misrepresented by the media, politicians, and local school boards, intelligent design can be defended on purely scientific grounds in accordance with the same rigorous methods that apply to every proposed origin-of-life theory. Signature in the Cell is the first book to make a comprehensive case for intelligent design based upon DNA. Meyer embarks on an odyssey of discovery as he investigates current evolutionary theories and the evidence that ultimately led him to affirm intelligent design. Clearly defining what ID is and is not, Meyer shows that the argument for intelligent design is not based on ignorance or "giving up on science," but instead upon our growing scientific knowledge of the information stored in the cell. A leading proponent of intelligent design in the scientific community, Meyer presents a compelling case that will generate heated debate, command attention, and find new adherents from leading scientists around the world.
|
| Customer Reviews:
Showing reviews 1-5 of 83
 DNA is not (just) a chemical November 7, 2009
John P. Rickert
2 out of 3 found this review helpful
The key message of this book, I think, can be put in the following way. Meyer does not put it this way himself, and if you disagree with me, you might not disagree with him. The message is: DNA is not a chemical, and therefore not just a chemical. DNA is composed of chemicals, certainly: A, C, T, G, and the rest, which do have well-defined chemical structures. For example, think of water, H2 O: two hydrogen atoms, one oxygen, and a very definite arrangement of them. But DNA is not a chemical in this sense, even though it is composed of chemicals. There is no "chemical formula" for DNA, and that is a reason why DNA has a flexibility to carry information far greater than the invariable structure of a water molecule.
When we look at the information content in a DNA molecule, we can first conclude that the information is not there as if by necessity. For example, the chemical structure of salt naturally makes it capable of forming crystals. The crystalline structure of salt is a direct consequence of the structure of salt. But the informational content of DNA and RNA is not like this, because the actual arrangement of the components is variable. Again, DNA is not a chemical the way water is a chemical; it doesn't have a fixed formula, and information is conveyed in what is variable. To borrow Meyer's example: the letters of the alphabet have fixed forms, but the spelling of words is not a necessary consequence of the properties of the letters. The same holds for A, C, T, G in regard to DNA.
Further, we can see that the informational content of DNA is so high that, relative to comparable molecules, i.e., ones of similar length and constituent building blocks, DNA is an extremely remote outlier. So remote that, using standard statistical methods and tests, we can conclude that DNA is not part of the population of molecules that would arise simply by chance.
The best explanation for this information, Meyer argues, is intelligence. Intelligence -is- capable of organizing and producing information, so at least it should make the lineup for consideration as an explanation; Meyer proceeds to examine and screen out the other possible explanations. By thus screening out, intelligence remains the only real possibility, or at least, the best, to explain the information seen in DNA, RNA, and proteins.
One could also add a highly pertinent observation from Etienne Gilson: Even if design is not accepted -as- an explanation, it is nevertheless a -fact- that needs explanation. (Cf. "From Aristotle to Darwin and Back Again.")
A few comments on particular chapters:
In ch. 11-14, Meyer discusses alternative theories to Intelligent Design. He relates how difficult it has been to come up with a self-replicating molecule. This is only part of the problem, and a fairly minor one at that, as far as the theory of evolution is concerned: If evolution were true, we would need not only a molecule that can self-replicate but also one that can undergo mutations and still self-replicate in mutated form. (And be capable of still further mutations itself.). This is a much greater problem than asking for self-replication alone.
In ch. 14, Meyer discusses "the RNA world" approach, and his criticisms of this approach all seem sound. I do think, however, that he should have put in a word or two about retroviruses. I don't think his arguments falter on account of this, but it would be good to discuss them for the sake of completeness.
In ch. 16, Meyer discusses his argument relative to Dembski's Explanatory Filter. I do not think this helps his argument: Anyone who accepts Dembski's Filter accepts the concept of intelligent design along with it. I would be hard pressed to imagine anyone saying, "Well, now that you put it that way, Dr. Meyer, I have to agree with you" due to appealing to Dembski's approach. On the good side, Meyer shows that his basic argument, an argument to best explanation, is compatible with Dembski's approach, and not dependent on it.
In this chapter, Meyer also makes a number of good, strong points to address the issue of "junk DNA," which is sometimes put forward as an argument against Intelligent Design. Yet, I think he could also make a more direct response: even if "junk DNA" really were junk and nothing more, this would not explain why the DNA of known usefulness has the high degree of structure and information that it has. If someone were walking in a city and saw a pile of rubble, the remains of a demolished skyscraper, he could say, "What a pile of junk," but this would do nothing to explain the skyscrapers standing around it. If I see an elaborate, baroque painting surrounded by a wall that is so plain it seems to need no explanation, even so, I still need an explanation for the painting.
Why 4 stars instead of 5? Three reasons: 1. I found the book too long-winded. Some things could be said in a shorter, more incisive way. Most readers will probably need a lot of perseverence to make it all the way through the book, and I hope that they do not flag in their reading before they get the whole outline of the argument. 2. Although his argument does not rely on Dembski's Filter, I come away with considerable uncertainty as to whether Meyer regards Dembski's filter as a test or as a criterion. I am inclined, with some reservations, to allow Dembski as a test, but certainly not as a criterion: there are manifestly things that are designed that do not exhibit "specified complexity" in the sense of the Filter. 3. In the early chapters, Meyer seems to be a little too concerned with his own place in the development of this approach. One could simply note that many very prominent theories that are now accepted met with considerable resistance at first and leave it at that. I am not saying that Meyer lacks modesty in his comments, even in those pertaining to himself, but instead that some of what he worries about in the initial chapters is not worth worrying about at all. A real scientist, or anyone really seeking the truth, should not worry about his reputation. Trying to find the truth, and live up to it, gives us more than enough to fill our attention.
 A reference book for intelligent design November 4, 2009
J. Friel (Furlong, PA USA)
4 out of 5 found this review helpful
In making his case for intelligent design, Dr. Meyer separates ID from the various arguments that try to confound it with creationism, and evolutionism, while not denying the theory of evolution and its processes. I am not an expert in biochemistry, but my knowledge of molecular biology was greatly increased after reading several of the chapters in this book. If you already know molecular biology, you can just skip them. The author goes to great length, literally, to derive ID theory and establish it as a better explanation for the origin of genetic information than competing theories. He also refutes many arguments that are commonly offered against it. This should be a reference book for the theory of intelligent design.
A Game-Changing Examination of the Origins of Life November 3, 2009
David B. Clotfelter (Porter Ranch, CA USA)
4 out of 5 found this review helpful
Two features make this book extraordinary. First, it is lucidly written, so that even a person with a relatively weak background in biochemistry, statistics, and the history and philosophy of science should be able to follow the argument with ease. There are technical sections written for experts, but Meyer always warns the reader in advance and suggests ways of getting the thrust of these sections without becoming bogged down in detail. Meyer is an highly gifted writer, with a rare ability to make complicated matters clear to the ordinary reader. His diagrams are also extremely helpful.
Second, the book is remarkably thorough. Meyer explains the information content of DNA and the structures of the cell in great detail, shows the mathematical improbability of such information arising by chance or by the influence of natural law, considers numerous proposals to explain the origin of life and shows why each has failed, makes a case that intelligent design does provide a good explanation of the information in DNA and in cellular structures, answers common objections, and lays out a number of research questions raised by the design hypothesis, including several that have already borne fruit.
Along the way, Meyer also introduces the reader to key issues in the effort to define science, and brings much clarity to those issues. This is significant, because one ploy used by those who would exclude intelligent design from consideration is the claim that it is not science. Meyer demolishes this pretense.
I believe this book is a game-changer. Because it is so well-written, it will be widely read. And because it is so thorough, it will put an end to most facile objections to Intelligent Design. It won't end the debate, but it will force it to a higher level, because critics will be unable to to ignore Meyer's lucid, sophisticated, and powerful argument. If you plan to read one book on the origin of life this year, it should be this one.
Maybe the world isn't flat... October 30, 2009
Donald M. Minter (Newport, Oregon)
7 out of 9 found this review helpful
We have been told for so very long that anyone who dared to doubt the basics of Darwinian assumptions, time and random chance, was less than intelligent. Meyer's text reminds us that there are indeed intelligent alternatives to Darwinism. More alarming, as suggested in a recent Newsweek article as well as Meyer's text, is the seeming 'world is flat' rule of law that appears to threaten any scientist who disagrees with basic Darwinism. Will we one day look back and laugh at those who really believed in 'time and chance' theories, in much the same way we ridicule those who believed the world was flat? Great read for those not afraid to think outside the box.
 Creationist non-sense October 30, 2009
Book fan
1 out of 22 found this review helpful
A book full of creationist arguments that do not make sense and are not supported by current data - just writing a bestseller does not make certain things true
Showing reviews 1-5 of 83
|
|
|
|
