Applied ID Work

At the University of Illinois, scientists have been working on increasing the efficiency of photosynthesis in plants.  To them, I say excellent work and thank you for the advance of ID science, for surely this is an example of ID science in action.  By employing design techniques, they were able to increase photosynthetic efficiency by as much as 76%.  This finding was made by studying the design on photosynthesis and using supercomputers to enhance that design.  In the future, we may be able to use these plants for all sorts of things from fighting global warming to energy uses, and it’s all thanks to ID.

Advertisements

5 responses to “Applied ID Work

  1. Interesting article, though I don’t know why anyone would find it “striking” that real photosynthesis in plants is so inefficient.

    Some scientists developed a genetic algorithm for photosynthesis and determined after 1500 generations that there was a potential for at least a 76% improvement in photosynthesis efficiency. I’m sorry, but I just don’t understand how does this support ID. Could I trouble you to explain the connection in more detail? Thank you!

  2. I’m not aware that anyone found it striking that photosynthesis is not 100% efficient. Did I give that impression?

    Anyway, this supports ID because it’s a direct example of ID in action. By directing the changes with a specific goal in mind, the authors are engaging in design work. They are designing new photosynthetic materials through a process that really isn’t evolutionary. Evolution works without set goals in mind, while ID can have set goals in mind. They put in specific goals, thus it is not evolution, but it is ID.

  3. The MSNBC article had a line from a scientist who found the 76% increase “striking.” It was on the second page, I think.

    Okay, let’s explore this directionality. Design and engineering by humans is trivial in the extreme as far as ID goes. Does ID exist in nature? If it does, how is it detected?

  4. Well, I didn’t remember the “striking” part in the article. I’m not sure why it is relevant though.

    And, yes, of course ID exists in nature since we exist in nature. That’s a silly question.

  5. Pingback: Further Discussion on IC « Professor Smith’s Weblog

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s