From Newsgroup: talk.origins

https://scienceandculture.com/2026/07/new-peer-reviewed-paper-provides-a-how-to-manual-for-using-id-to-guide-research/

The ID perps are touting a new "peer reviewed" paper published the the
ID scam journal BIO-Complexity. It is likely peer reviewed by other ID
perp scam artists.

https://bio-complexity.org/ojs/index.php/main/article/view/140

The Broad Utility of the Theory of Intelligent Design to Guide
Scientific Research

Abstract

Intelligent design (ID) is a scientific theory that uses the methods of historical sciences to infer that many features of nature are best
explained by an intelligent cause because they exhibit forms of
information and complexity that in our experience only come from
intelligence. ID is fundamentally a theory of design detection, but it
has also been applied as an experimental science to guide research into
how the natural world operates in the present day. ID uses a positive argument, beginning its investigations by studying known-designed
objects and the actions of intelligent agents to identify properties
that indicate design, such as complex and specified information,
irreducible complexity, purposeful coordination of parts, common design patterns, and functionality. Natural features can then be studied to
determine whether they meet the criteria for detecting design. These
hallmarks of design can then be further applied to model or predict how designed natural systems function. Discoveries made through such studies
of natural systems can then lead to improvements in human technology
through biomimetics. This paper will review how ID has been applied
within a variety of fields, including protein science, genetics, and systematics. It will also detail how engineering-based methodologies
grounded in ID principles, such as systems biology and systems
engineering, have advanced the study of multiple biological systems,
including the flagellum-chemotaxis system, glycolysis, vertebrate limbs
and joints, feathers, and brain blood flow.

The saddest thing about this "peer reviewed" paper is that it isn't a
research paper. They haven't done any research that would validate
their claims in this paper. What they need to do is accomplish what
they claim can be done, and publish it. They are just publishing the
claims without any valid research to back them up. They still have not accomplished any ID science. Not only that, but where they claim ID can
be applied leaves out the Top Six best scam gap denial arguments that
the ID perps have been selling for over 2 decades. They are really
admitting that gap denial isn't useful ID science, but that ID science
may be useful for some other biological systems that creationists have
not cared about.

These guys are like the Keystone Cops of scam artists. They are
admitting that they have just been fooling the rubes with the god of the
gap denial, and they are proposing that ID may be good for things that
the rubes don't want to know about. This is just more bait to con the
rubes with. It isn't even anything that they can teach in the public
schools because they haven't accomplished any science that they claim
might be done.

MarkE and Sticks should be very impressed by this effort since they both
don't want to deal with the Top Six gap denial arguments anyway. If the
ID perps are able to fill any of the Top Six with a designer, it will
just be more science to deny for both of them. This new use for ID is
no different. Just imagine when glycolysis was designed when the last
common ancestor of both Archaea and eubacteria had it to give to both bacterial lineages. It would have been designed billions of years
before the first plants were created on the 3rd day. Glycolysis may
predate the genetic code, but the original components were replaced by polypeptides after the genetic code evolved.

Ron Okimoto

--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2