Living things look like they were designed, so how do evolutionists know that they were not designed? 15 Questions for Evolutionists #6

Living things look like they were designed, so how do evolutionists know that they were not designed? Richard Dawkins wrote, “biology is the study of complicated things that have the appearance of having been designed with a purpose.”⁴ Francis Crick, the co-discoverer of the double helix structure of DNA, wrote, “Biologists must constantly keep in mind that what they see was not designed, but rather evolved.”⁵ The problem for evolutionists is that living things show too much design. Who objects when an archaeologist says that pottery points to human design? Yet if someone attributes the design in living things to a designer, that is not acceptable. Why should science be restricted to naturalistic causes rather than logical causes? See:Is the design explanation legitimate?

4. Dawkins, R., The Blind Watchmaker, W.W. Norton & Company, New York, p. 1, 1986. 

5. Crick, F., What mad pursuit: a Personal View of Scientific Discovery, Sloan Foundation Science, London, 1988, p. 138. 

15 Questions for Evolutionists -- Question 6
Question 6 in CMI's '15 Questions for Evolutionists' flyer focuses on the fact that one of the greatest challenges for evolutionists is that living things show too much design! If (as Francis Crick, the co-discoverer of the double helix structure of DNA, wrote) "Biologists must constantly keep in mind that what they see was not designed, but rather evolved" how do evolutionists know living things weren't designed?

Related Content

• List of the 15 questions with supporting information
• Why should science be restricted to naturalistic causes rather than logical causes?
• Design features Q&A page