The proponents in this debate appear to be unevenly matched.
Jonathan Wells received two Ph.D.'s, one in molecular and cell biology from the University of California, Berkeley, and one in religious studies from Yale University. He has worked as a postdoctoral research biologist at the University of California, Berkeley, and has taught biology at California State University, Hayward. Wells is also the author of Icons of Evolution: Science or Myth? Why Much of What We Teach About Evolution Is Wrong (Regnery Publishing, 2000).
William A. Dembski, who holds Ph.D.'s in mathematics and philosophy, is an associate research professor at Baylor University and a senior fellow with the Discovery Institute in Seattle. His books include The Design Inference: Eliminating Chance Through Small Probabilities (Cambridge University Press, 1998) and No Free Lunch: Why Specified Complexity Cannot Be Purchased Without Intelligence (Rowman and Littlefield, 2001). http://www.designinference.com/
Michael J. Behe, who received his Ph.D. in biochemistry from the University of Pennsylvania in 1978, is a professor of biological sciences at Pennsylvania's Lehigh University. His current research involves the roles of design and natural selection in building protein structure. His book Darwin's Black Box: The Biochemical Challenge to Evolution is available in paperback (Touchstone Books, 1998).
Eugenie C. Scott holds a Ph.D. in physical anthropology. In 1987, after teaching physical anthropology at the university level for fifteen years, she became executive director of the National Center for Science Education.(???) She is currently also the president of the American Association of Physical Anthropologists.
Barbara Forrest is an associate professor of philosophy at Southeastern Louisiana University. She received her Ph.D. from Tulane University. Her recent scholarly publications include "The Possibility of Meaning in Human Evolution," Zygon: Journal of Religion and Science, Dec. 2000.
Robert T. Pennock is an associate professor of science and technology studies and associate professor of philosophy in Michigan State University's Lyman Briggs School and department of philosophy. He is the author of Tower of Babel: The Evidence Against the New Creationism (MIT Press, 1999) and editor of Intelligent Design Creationism and Its Critics: Philosophical, Theological, and Scientific Perspectives (MIT Press, 2001).
Kenneth R. Miller is a professor of biology at Brown University. His research work on cell membrane structure and function has been reported in such journals as Nature, Cell, and the Journal of Cell Biology. Miller is co-author of several widely used high school and college biology textbooks, and in 1999 he published Finding Darwin's God: A Scientist's Search for Common Ground Between God and Evolution (Cliff Street Books).
Linz, here is the answer to the question you asked on another page.
ID does not have anything to do with God, unless you insist it does.
Evolution does this, evolution does that, it creates, it splices, it dices, it deletes your term paper.
A couple of quotes from one of the against, Miller:
The key proteins that clot blood fit this pattern, too. They're actually modified versions of proteins used in the digestive system. The elegant work of Russell Doolittle has shown how evolution duplicated, retargeted, and modified these proteins to produce the vertebrate blood-clotting system.
Working researchers, it seems, see something very different from what Behe sees in these systems -- they see evolution.
What is this evolution that ‘duplicates, retargets, and modifies? What is the thing called evolution seen by ‘working researchers’? It is not enough to name it, like you would a pet. It must be identified! What is it composed of? Where is it located? Does it exist elsewhere in the universe, or only on Earth? Why does it do what it does? How does it do what it does?
Are it's actions purposeful or random? Some claim it makes mistakes. Is that assessment anthropomorphic, is evolution akin to some drooling village idiot? I guess not, because most people agree that it appears to be intelligent. Does that make it a God? I can’t see why it would, anymore than making chicken soup would make me a God.
The only thing we seem to know about this process is that it designs stuff and is smart, and that is all we have cared to know for 150 years. I think it is time to know more. If this debate achieves that goal, I will be a happier man.