Malevolent Designer News - How Cold Sores Are Cleverly Designed To Maximise Suffering.

The human genome compacted inside cells
eight hours after infection.

Credit: Esther González Almela
and Álvaro Castells García

(Top) Cropped representative STORM-PAINT images of EdC-AF647 labeled hDNA (magenta), immunolabeled H3 (green), and their merge in mock and HSV-1 infected A549 cells. Scale bar: 2 µm. (Bottom) Zoomed-in regions are shown inside yellow boxes. Scale bar: 200 nm.

González-Almela, E., Castells-Garcia, A., Le Dily, F. et al. (2025)

Centre for Genomic Regulation Website

One of the many problems with Intelligent Design (ID) creationism is its complete failure to account for evolutionary arms races.

According to leading ID proponents like William A. Dembski and Michael J. Behe, living organisms and their parasites — including viruses — must have been intelligently designed because they are supposedly “irreducibly complex” and exhibit “complex specified information”. But if that were true, it would mean the same designer is deliberately crafting both parasites and the defence mechanisms their hosts use to fend them off — hardly the mark of a supremely intelligent creator.

A further problem, and one that creationists prefer to ignore, is theological: designing pathogens like viruses is fundamentally incompatible with the notion of a benevolent creator. In fact, it suggests a malevolent intelligence — one more concerned with maximising suffering than promoting life and maximising happiness. So, when science uncovers yet another example of a virus behaving with surgical precision and apparent ingenuity, ID creationists find themselves in a bind. Is irreducible complexity and complex specified genetic information not evidence of intelligent design after all? Or must they admit that the designer is, at best, morally indifferent — or worse, actively malevolent?

The latest headache for the ID camp comes courtesy of the Herpes simplex virus — the one responsible for cold sores. Researchers at the Centre for Genomic Regulation (CRG) in Barcelona, Catalunya, Spain, with colleagues in Guangdong Provincial People’s Hospital, Guangdong, China, have discovered that the virus can radically reorganise a host cell’s genetic architecture — and it does so using the host's own cellular machinery. Their findings have just been published open access in Nature Communications.

Unintelligent Designer News - Designed a Cure For COVID-19; Gave It To LLamas - Or Is It Malevolence?

How the single domain antibody locks onto the spike protein’s base

Researchers identify new antibodies against current and future coronaviruses | VIB.BE - Home

Hot on the heels of the news that the putative intelligent designer behind creationism apparently devised a method to prevent the spread of cancer cells through the body—then handed it to the sea cucumber, a group of species not especially prone to cancer—comes another remarkable revelation.

It now appears that this same designer, if we accept the claims of ID creationists, has also developed a highly effective mechanism for disabling the SARS-CoV-2 virus that causes COVID-19. And once again, rather than bestowing this gift upon humans, the species most affected by the virus, the designer gave it to llamas — creatures not exactly known for their vulnerability to coronaviruses.

The mechanism in question involves relatively simple molecules known as single-domain antibodies, or VHHs—also referred to as nanobodies. These are much smaller than the conventional antibodies produced by most animals, including humans. They work by binding tightly to the virus’s spike proteins, effectively neutralising it by preventing it from prising open host cells and initiating infection. Even more impressively, these nanobodies appear to be broadly effective against a wide range of SARS-related coronaviruses.

While creationists might marvel at the ingenuity of such a designer, they would be hard-pressed to explain — or more likely, would simply ignore — why this supposedly anthropophilic intelligence chose not to equip humans with such a defence. Instead, it stood idly by as millions suffered and economies collapsed, despite having the ‘cure’ readily available.

This unique llama-specific mechanism was discovered by a team of researchers led by Prof. Xavier Saelens and Dr. Bert Schepens at the Flemish Institute for Biotechnology (Vlaams Instituut voor Biotechnologie) – University of Ghent (VIB-UGent) Center for Medical Biotechnology.

Malevolent Designer - Creationism's Putative Desiger Designed A Way to Prevent Cancer Spreading - And Gave It To Sea Cucumbers!

A sugar compound found in sea cucumbers could hold the key to stopping the spread of cancer, according to a recent UM-led study published in Glycobiology.

Graphic by Stefanie Goodwiller
University Marketing and Communications

Sea Cucumbers Could Hold Key to Stopping Cancer Spread | Ole Miss

Imagine you're a designer, and you've created a species — humans — for whom you have a particular fondness. Only, something keeps going dreadfully wrong with your blueprint. A large number of them keep dying because their cells become cancerous when they fail to replicate properly, and these cancers then spread to other organs, which ultimately give up the ghost.

Now, you can’t quite work out why these cancers start. For some reason, you've included substances called glycans on the surfaces of cells, and — just to complicate things — you’ve made cancer cells produce an enzyme called Sulf-2, which alters these glycans to help the cancer spread. Your solution? A stroke of genius: create another enzyme that inhibits Sulf-2. And lo! It works.

So, who do you give this life-saving enzyme to?

If you're creationism’s supposedly super-intelligent designer, you don’t give it to your favourite species — the one made in your own image, no less. No, instead you bestow this miracle molecule upon… sea cucumbers. A species that, incidentally, doesn’t even have a problem with cancer.

This, if they actually understood the subject properly, is what Intelligent Design creationists consider compelling evidence of a supremely intelligent designer.

The discovery that sea cucumbers possess this enzyme was made by researchers at the University of Mississippi and Georgetown University in Washington, DC. Their findings are published in the journal Glycobiology and can be read here.

It’s also neatly summarised in a University of Mississippi news article:

Malevolent Designer News - How an Intelligent Designer COULD Have Made us all Immune to HIV but Chose not to

Researchers map 7,000-year-old genetic mutation that protects against HIV – University of Copenhagen

Let’s step into the mindset of an Intelligent Design (ID) creationist for a moment, as we examine a recent scientific study investigating why a small minority of people are immune to the Human Immunodeficiency Virus (HIV), while the vast majority are not.

A research team from the Novo Nordisk Foundation Center for Basic Metabolic Research (CBMR) at the University of Copenhagen, led by Professor Simon Rasmussen, has discovered that this immunity is conferred by a genetic mutation. This mutation originated in a single individual who lived near the Black Sea between 6,700 and 9,000 years ago.

According to Discovery Institute Fellow William A. Dembski, this mutation would represent what he calls “complex specified information”, a concept he attributes to an intelligent designer. Dembski argues that only such a designer could create the necessary genetic information, as mutation and natural selection alone are not goal-directed and therefore cannot produce the desired specificity. However, Dembski is notably vague about how we can objectively determine what genetic information is “specified” and what is not. He appears to rely on subjective judgement, essentially deeming any beneficial mutation as “specified”, while dismissing deleterious mutations as irrelevant.

Even granting Dembski his biased subjectivity, we are left with the implication that the mutation which conferred HIV immunity to this individual's descendants must have been “specified” by his proposed intelligent designer.

This raises an obvious question: if the intelligent designer of humans could have provided our species with immunity to HIV, why did it choose not to do so from the outset? Why rely on what appears to be a slow, natural evolutionary process to spread this mutation through the population—one that depends on people dying of HIV while those with the mutation survive and reproduce, creating the selection pressure for its spread? A process so gradual that, to this day, it remains a rare trait in the human gene pool, with only 18-25% of Danes carrying the mutated gene.

It also raised a couple of theological question for creationists: why would an omnibenevolent creator create HIV with its 'designed' ability to bypass our immune system the same designer allegedly designed to protect us and how is that an intelligent act by an omnibenevolent deity?

Malevolent Designer - How The Influenza Virus Appears To Be Intelligently Designed to Make Us Sick

Confocal microscopy of a cell (magenta, cell nucleus in blue) of the A549 cell line on immobilized influenza viruses (green).

© HZI / Broich

Influenza virus. 3D illustration showing surface glycoprotein spikes hemagglutinin purple and neuraminidase orange.

Image Credit: Kateryna Kon / Shutterstock.

HZI | How influenza viruses communicate with cells

In their attempts to pass creationism off as legitimate science, Discovery Institute fellows William A. Dembski and Michael J. Behe have unwittingly undermined their own case. Their arguments—largely based on a classic god-of-the-gaps fallacy and a false dichotomy—can just as easily be turned against the very idea that their supposed intelligent designer is the God of the Christian Bible.

While they stop short of making that claim explicitly, the infamous Wedge Document [1.1], which outlines the political aims and strategy of the Discovery Institute, leaves no doubt: their ultimate goal is a fundamentalist Christian theocracy governed by so-called "Christian principles" and that selling the idea that 'Intelligent Design' creationism is real science, is a fundamental aspect of that strategy because it would enable them to teach creationism to children at taxpayers' expense, under the guise of real science.

And yet, even within their own paradigm, the evidence points not to a benevolent deity but to something far more disturbing.

Take, for example, recent research from the Helmholtz Centre for Infection Research, which offers a striking illustration of what Dembski might call "complex specified information" and what Behe might regard as "irreducible complexity". The study reveals how the influenza virus is 'designed'—if one accepts their terminology—with remarkable sophistication to circumvent our defences and invade human cells. Ironically, these very defences are what the same creationists insist were intelligently designed to protect us—against, among other things, intelligently designed viruses. We are left, according to this worldview, with the absurd spectacle of a designer who engineers both the pathogens and the immune system meant to defend us from them—a system that, demonstrably, does not always work.

And this is held up as evidence of a supreme intelligence!

Far from supporting creationist claims, these findings align far more convincingly with what we would expect from a blind, indifferent process of evolution—one that requires no designer at all. Once again, creationists are faced with an uncomfortable dilemma: either accept the notion of a malevolent and inept designer or acknowledge the explanatory power of natural selection and evolutionary biology.

Bearing False Witness - Why the American Religious Right Are Lying Again.

Robert F. Kennedy Jr

The MMR vaccine doesn’t contain ‘aborted fetus debris’, as RFK Jr has claimed. Here’s the science

In recent years, vaccine misinformation has become an all-too-familiar feature of public discourse, often amplified by prominent figures with political or ideological agendas. One of the more persistent myths involves the claim that the MMR (measles, mumps, and rubella) vaccine contains material derived from aborted foetuses—a claim most recently repeated by Robert F. Kennedy Jr., a leading voice in the anti-vaccine movement.

In the article below, reproduced with permission under a Creative Commons licence, Professor Hassan Vally—a public health expert and epidemiologist—carefully and comprehensively dismantles this falsehood. Writing for *The Conversation*, he draws on decades of scientific research and vaccine development history to explain precisely why this claim is misleading, how vaccines are actually made, and why they remain one of the safest and most effective tools in modern medicine.

This piece is a timely and important correction to the misinformation circulating in some circles, particularly those aligned with religious or ideological opposition to vaccination. For readers unfamiliar with the scientific details, Professor Vally’s article offers a clear and accessible summary grounded in evidence and public health best practice.

First, an AI analysis of the reasons Kennedy and his far-right religious allies are deliberately misleading the American public and casually risking the lives of American children with a characteristic callous disregard for the children who will inevitably and predictably die as a result of this disinformation:

Malevolent Design News - How An 'Irreducibly Complex' Jumping Gene Survives To Cause Cancer

Credit: Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center.

Study Reveals Details of Process Driving Evolution & Major Diseases | NYU Langone News

A recent study by researchers at NYU Langone Health and Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München has shed new light on how certain genetic elements, known as "jumping genes," contribute to both human evolution and the development of disease [1.1].

Intelligent Design (ID) proponents, such as Discovery Institute fellow William A. Dembski, claim that any genetic information which is both complex and specific can only originate from an intelligent designer. Similarly, Michael J. Behe argues that any complex biological structure or process requiring all its parts to function could not have evolved gradually and therefore must have been deliberately designed.

These arguments rest on little more than the fallacies of argument from incredulity and the God-of-the-gaps. Worse still, they inevitably raise troubling theological implications: if such "complex specified information" leads to harmful outcomes—such as diseases, congenital disorders, or parasitism—then their supposed designer must be incompetent, indifferent, or malevolent. In the case at hand, the study focuses on a type of "jumping gene," or retrotransposon, which is known to cause genetic diseases including cancers.

Proponents of ID consistently sidestep these issues, as they conflict with their effort to portray the Bible as a scientifically accurate text describing a benevolent, human-centred creator.

Trump's Chickens May Be Coming Home to Roost - Carrying H5N1 Bird Flu

AI-generated image (ChatGPT 4o)

Americans don’t think bird flu is a threat, study suggests - CUNY Graduate School of Public Health & Health Policy

Elephant seals, killed by H5N1 'bird flu' on an Argentine beach.

Ralph Vanstreels, (UC Davis).

In the early days of the COVID-19 pandemic, President Donald Trump panicked when he realised that, in his eagerness to undo everything associated with Barack Obama, he had dismantled critical contingency plans for dealing with pandemics and allowed the national stockpile of personal protective equipment (PPE) to fall into disrepair. These actions left the United States ill-prepared for a public health crisis of such magnitude. Trump and his cronies promptly went into damage-limitation mode, i.e., blame everyone else (the buck stops over there!)

Rather than accepting responsibility, Trump—seemingly incapable of admitting error—chose to downplay the severity of the virus, which he referred to as the "Chaynees Vayrus". He repeatedly told Americans that COVID-19 was a mild illness that would "disappear" with the arrival of warmer weather in April (New York Times, 2020; Washington Post, 2020.1), ignoring both scientific advice and the obvious fact that seasonal changes vary globally, and that high temperatures do not neutralise the SARS-CoV-2 virus (WHO, 2020.2).

Having politicised the pandemic from the outset, Trump targeted public health officials such as Dr Anthony Fauci, whose science-based guidance often contradicted the president’s misleading statements (Science, 2020.3). Trump further encouraged scepticism toward basic mitigation measures such as social distancing, avoiding large gatherings, and wearing face masks. As a result, the wearing of masks was quickly stigmatised by many on the political right in the United States as a symbol of liberal or left-wing allegiance (Nature Human Behaviour, 2021). The consequences were stark: the White House itself became a hotspot for infections (BBC, 2020.4), and Trump’s campaign rallies became notorious super-spreader events (CDC Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report, 2021.1).
And the death toll in the USA was the highest by far of any developed nation, and higher than almost all under-developed economies with rudimentary health services¹.

This cultivated scepticism was eagerly adopted and amplified by conspiracy theorists within the Trump-supporting QAnon movement. A flood of increasingly absurd claims followed, including that the pandemic was a hoax, that vaccines contained nanotechnology to allow government tracking via Bill Gates, and even that the vaccines could alter DNA to change an individual’s sexual orientation (MIT Technology Review, 2021.2; Pew Research Center, 2020.5).

Underlying this environment of mistrust was a population that had, for decades, been influenced by creationist front groups such as the Discovery Institute. These organisations have consistently worked to undermine public confidence in science, promoting the narrative that science is a conspiracy by a secretive elite seeking to destroy spiritual values and replace "Christian America" with a secular, left-leaning "Darwinist" society (Forrest & Gross, Creationism's Trojan Horse, 2004; Branch & Scott, National Center for Science Education, 2009).

Unintelligent Design - The Design Defect That Can Cause a Cleft Palate - Incompetence, Malevolence or Evolution?

Medical science corrects a design defect.

Source

New study reveals how cleft lip and cleft palate can arise | MIT News | Massachusetts Institute of Technology

In my book, The Body of Evidence: How the Human Body Refutes Intelligent Design, I present numerous examples demonstrating that the human body is not the product of intelligent design, but rather the outcome of an evolutionary process characterised by compromises and suboptimal solutions. Evolution is constrained by what it has to work with and must continually balance competing demands—for instance, short-term reproductive success versus long-term health and well-being, which often contribute little or nothing to the long-term propagation of genes.

The result is an error-prone and overly complex system built upon earlier suboptimal compromises. This complexity gives rise to the many defects and medical problems to which humans are prone—problems that would not exist if the human body were the creation of an intelligent and benevolent designer, such as the deity posited by creationist belief systems. Such a deity would surely have designed a body so robust that there would be little need for a medical profession, save perhaps for treating accidental trauma. The very existence of hospitals and medical science stands as a testament to the failure of the human body's design to approach anything resembling the perfection many creationists claim.

Now, researchers at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) have identified yet another example of this flawed complexity: a defect in transfer RNA (tRNA) linked to babies being born with a cleft lip and palate. The defect lies in the DDX1 gene, which is essential for proper tRNA function. Without it, tRNA cannot deliver amino acids to ribosomes to synthesise proteins. In the absence of this crucial process, the cells that form the upper lip and the roof of the mouth cannot fuse correctly during development.

The findings, by a team led by Michaela Bartusel, are published in The American Journal of Human Genetics.

Malevolent Design - Why Did Bats Get a Better Immune System Than We Did?

A Carollia perspicillata bat from a colony that had been maintained at WSU Vancouver.

Photo: WSU

Seba's short-tailed bat, Carollia perspicillata

By Desmodus - Own work, CC BY-SA 4.0, Link

Bat cells could aid in fighting humans’ most deadly diseases | WSU Insider | Washington State University

Creationists assert that humans are the special creation of their designer god, placing humanity at the pinnacle of 'creation'. Even those theists who accept the Theory of Evolution but believe it was guided by God with humans as the intended ultimate outcome, regard humanity as their deity's supreme achievement.

If this claim were accurate, it would be reasonable to expect humans to possess the optimal anatomical and physiological characteristics across all biological systems. In reality, numerous species exhibit superior traits and abilities compared to humans—traits which, had they been bestowed upon humans, would have significantly improved our wellbeing and survival capabilities.

For instance, birds have a respiratory system far superior to mammals, including humans, enabling efficient oxygen exchange during flight. Raptors possess remarkable eyesight, allowing them precise vision at speeds that would render nearby objects a mere blur to human vision. Elephants, sharks, and naked mole rats exhibit extraordinary resistance to cancer. Furthermore, many mammals experience lower perinatal mortality rates than humans even with modern medical intervention.

As highlighted in a recent study published in PLOS Biology, bats tolerate viral infections that are often fatal to humans, so they can harbour evolving viruses that, when they find their way into humans, can result in serious pandemics such as the recent COVID-19 pandemic.

If we entertain the creationist argument, their purported intelligent designer had already perfected these advantageous traits in other species. Yet, paradoxically, humans were deprived of these beneficial adaptations. This scenario suggests a designer whose decisions could only be interpreted as either incompetent or malevolent. It is the equivalent of a car manufacturer having designed a super-efficient, low-emission and cheap engine in one of its models, continuing to fit an old, expensive, wasteful and polluting engine to its top of the range model.

However, the evolutionary explanation — that different species evolved distinct traits adapted specifically to their environmental pressures — fully clarifies why humans possess adequate but not necessarily optimal traits. Unfortunately for creationists, adherence to their dogma forces them to dismiss this rational explanation, instead endorsing a narrative that inadvertently portrays their intelligent designer as either incompetent, malevolent, or potentially both.

That bats have superior immune system to humans has long been known, but why that is in terms of their cell physiology is still something of a mystery. Now, however, a team of researchers led by Washington State University molecular virologist Michael Letko has developed two lines of bat cell cultures which can be used to study how their immune system responds to different viruses, for example, the ebola virus, with a view to utilising that information to treat infections in humans.

Their findings are the subject of a research paper in PLOS Biology and are explained in a Washington State University (WSU) news item:

Malevolent Design - How Dembski's 'Complex Specified Information' Causes Acute Myeloid Leukemia

Rapid growth of blood cancer driven by a single genetic ‘hit’

William A. Dembski’s concept of complex specified information (CSI) remains ambiguous—arguably by design. His use of the word specified is particularly opaque: is he referring to information that produces outcomes he wishes his readers to believe are purposeful and intelligently designed by a particular deity, or is the term intended to encompass any genetic information that results in any outcome—beneficial, neutral, or harmful?

Taken at face value, and in the absence of a clear, testable definition, there appears to be no reason Dembski’s concept could not apply to information that is ultimately detrimental, either to the organism itself, or to another organism in the case of parasites or cancer. Why, for instance, should we conclude that the complex information in a gene enabling the expansion of the human brain and the enhancement of cognitive function was specified, but that the equally complex genetic information enabling a cell to become a malignant cancer, or allowing the Plasmodium falciparum parasite to evade anti-malarial drugs, was not also specified by the same intelligent designer?

Given that Dembski is a senior fellow of the Discovery Institute — an organisation notorious for its Wedge Strategy, which seeks to undermine public trust in science through disinformation and misrepresentation while promoting creationism under the guise of scientific legitimacy — it is unsurprising that complex specified information remains a nebulous and ill-defined term. The strategy’s aim has never been to engage in genuine scientific discourse or subject its claims to critical scrutiny, but rather to advance a religious agenda while avoiding the accountability that comes with reasoned analysis and empirical testing. A cynic might conclude that the leading ID advocates know their claim has no scientific basis but want their target audience to believe otherwise.

So, I invite Intelligent Design creationists to explain why the recent discovery of a gene that promotes the rapid early development of acute myeloid leukaemia should not be an example of Dembski's 'complex specified information' and so evidence that Dembski's intelligent designer designed acute myeloid leukaemia, or whether Dembski's term is deliberately vague so as to appeal to people looking for confirmation of existing bias.

Unintelligent Design - If Scientists Can Do It, Why Can't an Intelligent, Omnipotent Designer - If It Wanted To?

Treatment for mitochondrial diseases within reach | University of Gothenburg

If the human body had truly been intelligently designed by an omnibenevolent, omniscient deity, it would operate flawlessly under all conditions, free from the compromises and constraints inherent in evolutionary history.

Were this the case, much of modern medicine would be unnecessary, limited perhaps to the management and repair of traumatic injuries. Parasites, should they exist at all, would be effortlessly repelled by a perfect immune system. Genetic and structural defects, such as hernias, atherosclerosis, autoimmune disorders, blindness, deafness, neurodegenerative diseases, and complications in childbirth would simply not occur.

However, as I showed in my book, The Body of Evidence: How the Human Body Refutes Intelligent Design, the human body is not the product of intelligent design; it has evolved through a process marked by trial and error, adaptation to existing structures, and the utilitarian pressures of survival and reproduction. This explains the vast array of medical conditions that keep healthcare systems busy, often stretched to their limits. It also drives the extensive scientific research dedicated to discovering the causes and developing cures for various illnesses—achievements that an omnipotent and omnibenevolent creator, if one existed, presumably would have provided already.

Recent news highlights this contrast starkly. Scientists may have discovered a groundbreaking cure for a rare mitochondrial disease caused by mutations in the POLG gene, a condition that leads to severe disability or even early death. This advancement prompts a critical question for creationists: If human scientists can find solutions to such devastating genetic problems, why can't—or won't—your purported intelligent designer? And perhaps, more to the point, why was this defect designed in the first place?

Malevolent Designer News - How Monkeypox Is Being Redesigned to Infect More People

Mpox could become a serious global threat, scientists warn | University of Surrey

Science has just dealt creationism another body blow.

Researchers from the University of Surrey, UK, have demonstrated that the monkeypox virus has undergone a mutation that enhances its ability to spread more readily from person to person through direct contact. This increased transmissibility raises the concern of a potential global pandemic.

Since this mutation confers a benefit to the virus, it aligns with William A. Dembski's concept of 'specified complexity', which he uses to argue for intelligent design. By extension, Dembski’s argument suggests evidence of an intelligent designer, whom his intended audience typically identifies as the Christian God.

However, because the mutation has resulted in a greater prevalence of the mutated form of the virus compared to non-mutated forms, this clearly demonstrates evolution through natural selection. Consequently, it contradicts the notion of 'devolution' proposed by Michael J. Behe, who suggests that parasites and pathogens represent biological deterioration rather than adaptive evolution.

Therefore, the new variant of the monkeypox virus presents either evidence supporting creationism's deity — which would imply intentional creation of viruses specifically designed to cause illness—or clear evidence supporting evolution through natural selection.

Unintelligent Design - How The Badly-Designed Immune System Destroys Lungs

Scientists Discover Immune Cell Networks Driving Deadly Lung Disease | Rutgers University

Autoimmune conditions and allergies provide strong evidence for evolution over intelligent design by highlighting the imperfections and trade-offs inherent in the immune system. These disorders demonstrate how a system shaped by natural selection can prioritize short-term survival at the expense of long-term health, leading to vulnerabilities that are difficult to reconcile with the concept of a perfect designer.

Autoimmune diseases occur when the immune system mistakenly attacks the body’s own tissues. Examples include rheumatoid arthritis, lupus, multiple sclerosis, and type 1 diabetes.

The immune system must strike a delicate balance: it must be reactive enough to fight infections but tolerant enough to avoid attacking the body’s own cells. Evolution has shaped this balance, but it is imperfect. A hyperactive immune system, while better at combating infections, increases the risk of autoimmune diseases.

The Body of Evidence: How the Human Body Refutes Intelligent Design pp. 129-130

Now it's beginning to look like we must include the fatal lung disease known as idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (IPF) to the long list of autoimmune conditions that stem directly from the facts that the immune system evolved and was not intelligently designed.

The very existence of the immune system should prompt creationists to reconsider several basic beliefs and especially claims made by leading proponents, such as Michael J. Behe. Behe suggests that pathogens and the diseases they cause result from 'genetic entropy', a degradation enabled by biblical 'Sin', which supposedly causes genomes to 'devolve', thus creating parasites and pathogens. Other creationists suggest an alternative viewpoint, attributing the existence of parasites and diseases to an evil designer, such as Satan - a claim which is regarded as blasphemous by fundamentalists for whom it is doctrine that there is only one creative entity - God.

In contrast, William A. Dembski argues that any 'complex specified information' (CSI) within the genome must originate from an intelligent designer, typically inferred — though seldom explicitly acknowledged by prominent creationists — as the God described in the Bible or the Qur'an. The genes that enable parasites to evade our immune defences are clear examples of what Dembski would term CSI, whereas Behe regards these genes as 'devolved' from an initially perfect creation.

However, neither Behe nor Dembski adequately addresses the question of who or what designed the immune system itself. Was it the same designer responsible for Dembski's complex specified information, or was it Behe's designer of an initial, perfect creation? If we consider Dembski's argument, it raises a critical question: where is the intelligence in designing an immune system to protect organisms against pathogens created by the very same designer? Regarding Behe's perspective, if the immune system were part of the initial perfect design, why would the designer anticipate 'The Fall' and its consequences unless it was intentionally planned? Alternatively, did all organisms possessing immune defences receive an upgrade after 'The Fall', indicating a supposedly omniscient deity initially failed to foresee the need for such protection? This then raises the question, is the designer either not omniscient or not competent, or did it plan for the 'Fall' and the suffering caused by parasites all along?

Not only are there these gaping flaws in creationism's attempts to account for the immune system within their own theology, including its failure to protect us and its propensity to attack us because the delicate balance referred to above is not robust enough or sensitive enough. The fact is that a perfectly designed immune system should make much of medical science redundant. However, the evidence continues to accumulate that the immune system, like the rest of biology is not the result of intelligent design but of an evolutionary process with all its inherent faults, constraints and inevitable suboptimal compromises.

Evidence strongly supporting the theory that IPF is the result of an autoimmune response by an over-sensitive immune system has been provided by a team of researchers led by Rutgers University, New Jersey, USA. Their findings are being published in the European Respiratory Journal and are described in Rutgers Today:

Refuting Creationism - Students Discover How The Mammalian Immune System Evolved.

Nebraska undergrads uncover ancient secrets of human immunity | Nebraska Today

(C–F) Expanded views of the interaction interface between STAT2 CCD and IRF9 IAD for mouse (C), human (D), Hypanus sabinus (E), and Stegostoma tigrinum (F). The interactions are observed in the crystal structure of the mouse STAT2-IRF9 complex (PDB ID: 5OEN) [19.1]. For humans and the two cartilaginous fishes, the interactions are based on the modeled structures of the STAT2-IRF9 complex. The key residues involved in the interface are labeled. The phenylalanine (F) on the STAT2 protein is colored in green. The four residues forming the cleft on the IRF9 protein are colored in magenta. The corresponding sequences of the interface area and other details are found in Supporting Information S1: Figure S3.

Recent research conducted by undergraduate students at the University of Nebraska–Lincoln has provided compelling insights into the evolutionary development of the human immune system. Under the guidance of Professor Luwen Zhang, students Vanessa Hubing, Avery Marquis, and Chanasei Ziemann co-authored two significant studies published in the Journal of Medical Virology. Their work elucidates the progression of immune regulatory mechanisms in vertebrates, highlighting the transition to more complex systems with the evolution of jaws. Additionally, they explored how a pseudogene, potentially introduced into primate DNA via a retrovirus approximately 60 million years ago, may have enhanced ancestral immune responses.

These findings offer robust evidence supporting the theory of evolution by demonstrating the gradual and adaptive changes in genetic material that have led to sophisticated immune functions in humans. The identification of a pseudogene's integration into primate DNA and its subsequent role in immunity exemplifies natural selection's influence on genetic composition over millions of years. Such evidence challenges creationist perspectives by providing concrete examples of evolutionary processes shaping complex biological systems, underscoring the dynamic nature of genetic evolution in response to environmental pressures.

During the course of evolution, these factors have evolved as additional layers of complexity to improve and refine a system which, as the product of an unplanned, utilitarian evolutionary process was a suboptimal compromise between the tendencies to over-react to some infections and fail to respond to others. An intelligently-designed sytem would need no such regulatory mechanisms. This is how we can tell that such overly-complex systems were not intelligently designed.

The Unintelligent Designer - Another Error-Prone Bungle to Compensate for a Bungled Design

William Heath Robinson

Peacekeeper cells protect the body from autoimmunity during infection | Biological Sciences Division | The University of Chicago

A significant issue with our immune system is that it is poorly "designed." If it were truly the product of an intelligent designer, as creationists claim, that designer would hardly be competent enough to design a simple household item, let alone a complex biological system.

Because our immune system is so disorganized and inefficient, multiple layers of complexity have evolved to mitigate its worst shortcomings. However, these added layers themselves remain prone to errors, as they reflect the same flawed foundation. The central problem arises because the immune system must balance two contradictory requirements: it needs to be sensitive enough to identify and eliminate genuine threats, yet not so sensitive that it mistakenly attacks the body's own tissues.

While an omnipotent, supremely intelligent designer should have easily resolved such a contradiction, the reality is that our immune system frequently fails on both counts. It often permits pathogens and parasites to invade, and it also frequently turns against the body itself, leading to autoimmune diseases such as lupus, diabetes, multiple sclerosis, arthritis, and kidney or liver failure, among numerous other debilitating conditions that cause immense suffering.

Like the whimsical contraptions created by cartoonist William Heath Robinson — complex machines built from objects originally intended for entirely different purposes - the mammalian immune system is not designed top-down from a clear blueprint. Rather, it's built up gradually from one makeshift adaptation piled onto another, each new solution attempting to compensate for the shortcomings of earlier ones. Eventually, this process results in a ramshackle system so intricate that its complexity itself creates new opportunities for failure. Such complexity is not indicative of intelligent, purposeful design, which would typically favour simplicity and efficiency. Instead, it reflects an ad hoc, utilitarian approach driven by evolutionary constraints and an inability to anticipate future challenges.

And of course, this embarrassment for creationism is made worse by the fact that, according to Michael J. Behe, pathogenic parasites such as E. coli and Plasmodium falciparum are examples of irreducible complexity, so are, in creationist circles, unarguable 'proof' of intelligent design, so the immune system is allegedly designed by the designer of these pathogens to protect us from them.

It seems creationists have no difficulty in believing the same designer would design parasites to make sick, then design a system to protect us from its pathogenic designs, and even though that system doesn't work very well, it is nevertheless evidence of supreme intelligence.

Refuting Creationism - How Chimpanzees Have Evolved For Different Parasites, Including Malaria

Mother and baby chimpanzee in Uganda.

Kevin Langergraber, The Ngogo Chimpanzee Project.

Chimpanzees are genetically adapted to local habitats and infections such as malaria | UCL News - UCL – University College London

It can't be easy making a living as a creationist grifter when science continually undermines your claims, exposing your misrepresentation of evolutionary biology and eroding your credibility — even among the faithful supporters you count on to pay for confirmation of their biases. It must be a relief that your target will rarely, if ever fact check your claims, making them easy victims of your disinformation.

So, you can take comfort in the fact that none of your marks will read this piece of research that shows how chimpanzees are closely related to humans and have evolved over time to adapt to a number of different environments, much the way the ancestors of modern humans adapted when their environment changed from forest to savannah, some 6 million years ago.

Included in the study is how chimpanzees, who have been suffering from malaria for much longer than humans, humans having acquired their most deadly species of the plasmodium parasites from chimpanzees only some 300,000 years ago and possibly as recently as 50,000 years ago, have evolved resistance to the parasite so they now show almost no signs of infection.

Malevolent Design - How a Design Blunder Caused Parkinson's Disease - Or Was It Malevolence?

Two PINK1 proteins are shown attached to the membrane of a mitochondrion for the first time.

Scientists solve decades-long Parkinson’s mystery | WEHI

One of the causes of Parkinsonism is the accumulation of defective mitochondria in neurone leading to the death of these cells and reduced neurotransmitter production. Under normal circumstances, a protein known as PTEN-induced putative kinase 1 (PINK1) attaches to the surface of damaged mitochondria and facilitates their destruction, but when a mutation causes PINK1 to malfunction, this cell hygiene mechanism fails.

The question for creationists is why this cell hygiene process is needed in the first place when an intelligent designer could have designed more robust mitochondria, and why does it depend on an error-prone process where a simple mutation is the gene for a key protein can cause the whole thing to fail?

In fact, of course, what we have here is an example of a layer of complexity being necessary because a fundamental process is suboptimal, when a well-designed process would need no such additional layer of complexity. Additional complexity simply multiplies that opportunity for failure, especially when the additional complexity is itself suboptimal.

As an example of putative intelligent design, the result is exactly what we would expect a mindless, unintelligent process to produce.

Malevolent Design - The Sneaky Way The Epstein-Barr Virus Can Cause Multiple Sclerosis

The Epstein-Barr virus (EBV)

Image: Getty Images

The Epstein-Barr virus (EBV) is very common and can cause glandular fever in young adults.

Image: Getty Images

Genes combined with immune response to Epstein-Barr virus increase MS risk | Karolinska Institutet

To believe in the childish notion of intelligent design by an omniscient, magical designer is to believe two things:

• That it created our shoddy immune system that not only fails to protect us from pathogenic organisms such as bacteria, fungi and virus that frequently infect us.
  
• That it also designed those pathogens and gave them the ability to not only evade our immune system but also turn it against us to ensure we suffer the long-term effects of infections, even when we have eliminated the causative parasite from our bodies.

In other words, creationism is to believe the putative designer is incompetent and/or malevolent.

Malevolent Designer News - How Tuberculosis Is Protected During Airborne Transmission

This article is best read on a laptop, desktop, or tablet

Scientists have discovered a family of genes that becomes essential for survival specifically when the tuberculosis pathogen is exposed to the air, likely protecting the bacterium during its flight.

Image: iStock; MIT News.

Study: Tuberculosis relies on protective genes during airborne transmission | MIT News | Massachusetts Institute of Technology

Imagine you're the designer of a nasty little pathogen that is designed to make people sick and die, but you have a problem. The organism needs to get from one victim to the next in order to spread and make as many people sick as possible, but, as an obligate pathogen, it is designed to life in the moist warm interior of its victims, so is not very good at living outside, where it needs to be, if only briefly, to get into its next victim.

Quite a problem, eh?

But not something beyond creationism's divine malevolence, it seems, because, if you accept creationists' argument for the moment, the parasitic organism that causes tuberculosis is specially designed to survive while in transit, so to speak.

Exactly how it does it has recently been discovered by researchers at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) and their collaborators. The key to its survival is a family of genes that were previously believed to be non-essential because they had no effect when injected into a potential host but have now been shown to be essential for survival outside a host's body.