ABSTRACTS OF CONCURRENT PRESENTATIONS

1. The Design Inference and the Future of Science.

Lydia McGrew.

Likely Machines: a Response to Elliott Sober’s ‘Testability.’

Philosopher of science Elliott Sober has argued that ID presents only a negative case against Darwinism, but that this is insufficient to establish design. He also insists that necessary information is not available for making the positive case that design is a better explanation of living systems than naturalism. While agreeing with Sober that design cannot be established by an eliminative argument, I argue that it is possible to estimate the relative likelihoods of some biological features on design and non-design. Irreducible complexity, in particular, is a specific property for which evidence is available showing a high likelihood on design.

Robin Collins.

Can the Hypothesis of Design lead to a Fruitful Scientific Research Program?

In this essay, I will show how the hypothesis that the world was designed could lead to a fruitful scientific research program. I will call the proposal I develop "methodological theism." I will then briefly sketch the advantages of this idea over the standard articulation of the Intelligent Design (ID) program: for example, unlike what is implied by many of the current articulations of ID, methodological theism does not require that Darwinian evolution be shown to be inadequate in order to engage in a science based on design. Thus, it lowers the burden of proof required for advocates of a design-based science

Mark Kalthoff.

Intelligent Design in the Undergraduate Classroom.

Issues at the interface of science and religion almost always command the attention of thoughtful Christian college students. Questions dealing with origins (i.e., with evolution and Genesis) garner the lion’s share of anxiety from those undergraduates determined to take both their faith and modern science seriously. This reality has intensified with public critiques of naturalism and evolutionary theories mustered in recent years by the proponents of "Intelligent Design" (ID) theory. The issues are interdisciplinary, involving at least science, philosophy, and theology. If one aim of liberal arts education remains the cultivation of an integrative understanding – of a habit of mind that recognizes connections between disciplines that are never wholly separable from one another – then an undergraduate philosophy seminar focusing upon ID offers an ideal venue for contemporary liberal learning. This conviction motivated a new philosophy seminar taught on the campus of Hillsdale College during the autumn semester of 1999. The course was called "Mere Creation: Science, Evolution & Intelligent Design." This talk offers an overview of that experience with the aim of answering several questions: What did the course include? What did it exclude? What worked? What didn’t? Why? What did the students want from the course? What did they get from the course? Is ID theory a useful pedagogical tool for engendering a liberal integrative understanding of relevant disciplines? Copies of the course syllabus will be available for conferees. The driving assumption of this talk is that the experience of one college professor may prove valuable for others – not as a model or an ideal, but as a cautionary tale containing a few nuggets that may merit emulation or avoidance.

John Silvius, Mary Korte, Don Korte.  

Ideas and Approaches for Biblical Integration in Biological Sciences. 

The necessity of teaching college biological science from a theistic perspective has never been greater than in the present era in which the unprecedented technological advancements that offer promise for the betterment of mankind are being abused in a culture clouded by moral relativism that threatens our ability to exercise proper stewardship of these advances. In this context, many of us have the privilege of engaging young minds that are seeking answers to questions that we believe have firm answers from a perspective that claims faith in a God Who reveals Himself through purpose and design in His Word and world. Participants in this segment are invited to bring handouts and to share conceptual models and classroom and laboratory approaches which they have used to teach biology from a theistic perspective. Areas of particular emphasis will include evidences of intelligent design in nature from ecosystem to molecule; and, application of an "intelligent design perspective" to such aspects of biology as how students are taught to approach problems scientifically, and how students should view some of life’s challenging issues such as their own self regard and purpose in life, human sexuality, genetic disorders, sanctity of life, and environmental stewardship.

Gary Locklair.

Cosmogony: Pedagogy and Taxonomy.

Fruitful discussion of origin issues is enhanced when a viable organizational framework is provided. This paper outlines one such classification scheme for cosmogonical issues and demonstrates its use within an educational setting. Here is one possible model for objectively approaching a serious investigation into the science of origins.

Cosmogony, the science of origins, requires a taxonomy, or framework, for fruitful research and pedagogy. The framework is especially important for effective communication of and education in origin issues. Just as biologists benefit from the Linnaean classification system for flora and fauna, so too origin researchers can profit from an agreed taxonomy for their work.

This particular framework has been used successfully in a university course on Cosmogony for a decade. It has resulted in less ambiguity and better communication within the educational setting.

John Davison.

Ontogeny, Phylogeny and the Origin of Biological Information.

Accepting the evidence that evolution is largely finished and that sexual reproduction is incapable of supporting macroevolution, indicates that macroevolutionary changes were produced presexually through the cytological events associated with the first meiotic division. This reproductive mode is ideally suited to the production of new structural rearrangements of preexisting genetic information in instantaneous homozygous form. These new arrangements (position effects) produce new and discrete species. Thus, speciation results not from new genetic information, but rather from information already present (preformed). The several parallels that exist between epigenesis and preformation in both ontogeny (development) and phylogeny (evolution) are discussed. I propose that both of these phenomena have proceeded through the selective activation (derepression) of an enormous potential supply of information already present at the onset of each of these biological phenomena. Acceptance of these possibilities can serve to liberate us in our quest for the ultimate truth concerning these two closely related phenomena.

John Ollason.

Artificial Design in Natural History.

Descartes argued that animals were machines, and machines have

designers. Hume showed that design arguments are analogical, and logically questionable, but Natural Theology and Natural History shared design arguments until the publication of The Origin of Species. Afterwards they persisted unchanged in evolution, Natural Selection replacing Divine Providence as the agent. Galen explained anatomy in terms of design to do what we now know does not happen, proving that design arguments are circular, the structures being assumed to be designed to do what they seem to do. Design in Nature is therefore a premise not an hypothesis.

4. The Proper Roles of Science and Religion. HS 015.

Ralph MacKenzie.

Science and Creation: A Historical Survey.

This paper has a 3-fold purpose. It briefly examines the views of the Church Fathers and Medieval doctors on Science and Creation. Then, there is an investigation of the "Galileo Affair" and the views of such Protestants as Martin Luther and John Calvin. Finally, it studies Vatican I and II documents which address the inerrancy of Scripture and the resulting implications for doing science.

Vickie Hess.

Vickie Hess will expand on the following letter to the Editor:

In response to the aptly titled Point of View column, "Article of Faith: Science and Religion Don’t Mix," I would suggest that Dr. Krauss is, indeed, defending a quasireligious faith he calls Science. I do not refer to "science" as a collection of experimental, observational, and theoretical methodologies that have been successful over a period of several hundred years in answering questions about natural phenomena. I refer, rather, to that view of Science, which, states (without proof) that "simple laws of nature explain every event that has happened since the Big Bang." As a scientific statement, this warrants careful examination, and is a far more sweeping generalization than cautious, conservative scientists are usually willing to make. Indeed, there is a risk of its being circular. There are phenomena for which no satisfying explanation is currently available; do we accept the tentative explanations because those are the only ones that science has to offer? Do we do so on the assumption that a scientific explanation must be available? If so, we have assumed the statement we intended to support. However, as a "religious" truth-claim, such a statement fits right in with truth claims made within other worldviews. Science-as-worldview has much in common with traditional religions. Besides claiming to provide the valid way to look at the world, it has its own mythology (even casual inquiry reveals that the Galilean controversy was far more complex than the common portrayal as Good-Honest-Inquirer-vs. -Bad-Defender-of-Ignorance-Church. It has its "heathens" to oppose ("Religious fundamentalists …spout nonsense…) And it calls its "faithful" to action ("Scientists must become evangelists…") I do not wish to imply that every belief, traditionally religious or otherwise, is reconcilable with fact. However, we need to recognize that Science and "religion" are frequently antagonistic, not because of matters of fact, but because of clashing worldviews.

Phil Ruetz.

William Dembski defines intelligent design to be three things: A scientific research program, an intellectual challenge to naturalism, and a "way of understanding divine action." Upon this definition, intelligent design is a philosophical and theological, as well as scientific, endeavor. But Dembski’s actual commitment to the comprehensiveness of intelligent design is not exactly clear. Specifically, I would like to examine Dembski’s claims that intelligent design is theologically minimalist.

5. Intelligent Design and Natural Theology. B 027.

James Bohn.

Beyond the Fire of Prometheus--The Capacity for Human Speech: Empirical Evidence for the Image of God.

The theological concept of the Imago Dei should delineate a radical difference between human beings and all other creatures on earth. The purpose of this paper is to explore whether some aspect of the Image of God is empirically observable. Specifically, is the capacity for speech evidence of the Image of God in human beings?

This paper is a return to the rubric of "Empirical Theology," that is, the notion that evidence of what God has created should be observable in both the social and physical sciences. It was formerly known as British Natural theology, which assumes an intelligent designer. This methodology honors Scripture by assuming its inerrancy, and seeks to find evidence in the social and physical sciences to persuade skeptics of the claims of Scripture. Thus, it supports the postulate of Intelligent Design.

Paul Boehlke.

A Lutheran Response to Intelligent Design.

The possibility of detecting evidence for intelligent design in nature requires scientific processes. Assumptions, inferences and acceptance of existing science are necessary. Furthermore, science is always a product of its times. Because science is a subjective human activity, any resulting arguments will be constantly subject to doubts, revisions and falsification. History shows that science changes. Furthermore, the nature of modern science includes a deeply-held presupposition that limits science to consideration of only natural causes. Arguments for design lead to "presuppositional angst," and judgment is finally by the scientific community. While nature declares that there is a Designer, present-day science does not.

6. What Difference does Design make to Science." B029.

Craig Rusbult.

If science is defined as a search for truth, the critical analysis offered by design theory can be scientifically useful by promoting a more accurate evaluation of naturalistic theories. Although claims for design are based on a logical analysis of empirical data, design theories have been criticized for not being potentially falsifiable. A careful examination shows that design theories are empirically

responsive and they can be falsified. Due to limitations in our knowledge about future theories, advocates of design should be cautious in making claims, but the possibility that design theories could make valuable scientific contributions

should be recognized.

Stephen Meyer, Scott Minnich and Paul Nelson.

The Heuristic Value of Design.

Further comments will be made on the fruitfulness of design for predictions and testing, the practice and value of reverse engineering and the importance of design for higher level biological properties.

1. Fine Tuning Arguments: For and Against. Lake Shore Room.

Allen Utke.

Natural Theology: Cosmic Coincidence, Carbon, and Conundrums.

In the last 50 years, an incredibly intricate network of finely-tuned natural laws and physical constants has been discovered at the heart of reality. The anthropic principle is the only explanation for the fine-tuning offered by science to date, but two radically different interpretations of the principle have resulted.

Some scientists maintain the fine-tuning is the result of "coincidences" in an accidental universe. However, others, including the author, maintain the fine-tuning can serve as a "new" basis for the renascence of the argument from design in natural theology.

In the paper, the author presents a broad, non-technical overview of the anthropic principle controversy, but from a "different" little-known perspective. For, he innovatively extends the anthropic principle to "cosmic carbon," the basis of life, while, overall, uniquely maintaining that the controversy actually represents a (re)turn to (Greek) cosmology, and beyond, to "the Ionian Revolution."

Tim McGrew and Eric Vestrup.

Probabilities and the Fine-Tuning Argument.

Proponents of the fine-tuning argument frequently assume that the narrowness of the life-friendly range of fundamental physical constants implies a low probability for the origin of the universe "by chance." We cast this argument in a more rigorous form than is customary and conclude that the narrow intervals do not yield a probability at all because the resulting measure function is non-normalizable. We then consider various attempts to circumvent this problem and argue that they fail.

2. Critique of Design in the Public Schools. HS 105.

John Staver.

Consequences of Intelligent Design—Kansas Style—on K-12 Science Education in Kansas.

The Kansas State Board of Education approved new science standards by a 6–4 vote that removed evolutionary theory, compromised the concept of an ancient Earth and universe, and altered the nature of science over the objections of its own expert writing team of twenty-seven (27) Kansas K-12 science teachers, science educators, and scientists. The author’s purpose in this paper is to discuss the consequences of the Board’s action on science standards. To accomplish his purpose, the author briefly presents the results of a content analysis of the changes between the writing team’s last draft and the Board approved draft. The most pervasive consequence of the Board’s action is a new portrayal of the nature of science, one only vaguely stated in the Board approved standards but described more clearly in other documents produced by the Creation Science Association for Mid-America (CSAMA), which actively supported individual Board members’ efforts. This description represents an understanding of the nature of science that the CSAMA writers view as consistent with their fundamentalist Christian views. For these folks, science begins with the unquestioned belief that the Genesis account of origins is a factual and true account of the actual events of creation. Accepting this as absolute truth, they argue that Genesis provides a sound base for scientific research. Given all of this, they believe that one can engage in scientific pursuits to verify the absolute truth of Holy Scripture; however, if scientific work yields results that conflict with Holy Scripture, then that scientific work is wrong.

Gerald Skoog.

Intelligent Design: A Reappearance of Natural Theology Which Has No Place in Science Classrooms.

This paper describes the tenets of natural theology and intelligent design as manifested in an 1832 tract and a contemporary textbook. The tenets of natural theology and Puritan epistemology lost their influence in the nation’s colleges and universities in the late 1800s. Then as now, secondary school science curriculum reflected and was influenced by the science curriculum in higher education. As a result, the tenets of natural theology, creationism, or intelligent design have not been included in secondary school science textbooks. Two important milestones in the history of science were the vesting of authority in experiment and the premise that the entirety of the physical universe was knowable and discoverable by humans. The tenets of natural theology, which provide the foundation for intelligent design, are derived from authority and philosophic axioms and not evidence derived from data. The tenets of natural theology rule out causality and contingency. While it is possible that the forces and products of nature are the result of an intelligent design, it must be remembered there is much evidence that things that are possible do not always happen. Overall, the inclusion of the tenets of intelligent design would impinge on the integrity of science, the science curriculum, and science teachers. In the process, the scientific literacy of students and the nation overall would suffer.

3. Metaphysical and Methodological Naturalism. HS 011.

David Reiter.

Do Hearts ever Malfunction? Plantinga on Proper Function and Naturalism.

It is obvious that what we call "heart attacks" sometimes occur. But a philosophically interesting question is: Do hearts ever truly malfunction? Is there such a thing as proper function for hearts? In Warrant and Proper Function, Alvin Plantinga presents an argument for the conclusion that if hearts sometimes malfunction, then metaphysical naturalism is false. This conclusion is based on Plantinga's critique of attempts to analyze the concept of proper function without reference to a designer. In this paper, I begin to explore the question of just how much support this argument provides for supernaturalism.

Dan Crawford.

Johnson, Pennock and Metaphysical Naturalism.

An evaluation is given of the dispute between Robert Pennock and Phillip Johnson on the nature of science. While not uncritical of Johnson, Crawford shows that Pennock’s defense of methodological naturalism fails to address Johnson’s concerns about the biases of contemporary science.

 

4. Skeptics of Evolutionism. HS 015.

Tim Albers.

Psychology and the Anti-Designer in Mutual Illusory Support: Musings from the Field.

Just as anti-designer science has stripped morality from the public square, leaving us to seek illusions to compel us to be good, so it has stripped reality itself from the psychotherapy room, leaving us to seek illusions to help us through the night. Albers critiques the recent work of psychologist Paul Vitz, which indicates possible prejudicial motivation for the naturalist position. He then suggests that it is time to re-examine, on a level playing field, the merits of a worldview foundation for both science and psychotherapy which, rather than resorting to admitted illusions, offers grounding in a livable reality.

Joseph Mastropaolo.

Devolution, Design and Biosphere Extinction.

       The Structure Law states that the universe is constructed entirely of energy. The Function (Event) Law requires the conversion of an available energy in order for anything to occur. The First and Second Laws of Thermodynamics respectively forbids the creation of new energy and requires every energy conversion (event) to diminish (devolve) available energy. The thesis of this paper is that these four laws, called here the Energy Laws, apply to the entire universe, nonviable and viable alike. This thesis, called the Law of Devolution, further summarizes the Energy Laws while unifying the science of biology with the sciences of physics and chemistry. By mutual exclusion it eliminates the imaginary, unobservable concept in all its variations called, evolution. By the application of the Event Filter and the Law of Small Probability to a minimal cell, the entire biosphere is identified without doubt as designed.
         The concept, uniformitarianism, is imaginary until extinction of the universe. Until then, the Law of Devolution prevails exclusively. If evolutionists insist on bridging the chasm between life forms, then they must teach that humans devolved to apes, then monkeys, then eventually bacteria. This is less ridiculous and harmful than teaching diametrically opposite to the reality of devolution. Genetic disorders as well as fatal birth defects have been increasing exponentially and do confirm the human and biosphere innate progressions toward extinction. Devolution is universal. Evolution is imaginary.
       Evidence presented identifies evolution as an occult, nonexistent nonscience militantly suppressing knowledge of biosphere devolution and its innate inability to restitute itself from unlimited human damage. This militates against moral human stewardship and accelerates the destruction of all life forms. This militant destructive activity foreign to science and morality is identified here as the summit of criminality. For self-defense against human and biosphere extinction, evolution must be expunged worldwide.

 

Phil White.

Simulations, Simians and Shakespeare.

To counter the widespread acceptance of Darwinian evolution, portions of today’s society are popularizing the idea that an intelligent being created the universe, and that the proof of this being is implicit in the design of the universe (i.e., theory of intelligent design). However, what is perceived as evidence of design is hard to distinguish from what could be explained by chance events and is therefore too subjective to use as the basis of objective proof.

David Ford.

Hume on Inferring from Seeming-Design the Attributes of Intelligence.

The more we study the biological world, the more it appears to be the

complex product of intelligent design. David Hume conceded that biology appears designed. Speculation that random rearranging of matter could result in biology's and physics' seeming-design is implausible. Likening the universe to reproducing organisms fails to recognize the fact that animal reproduction involves the transmission of complexity, not its origination. Observing entities' appearance is not necessary to form hypotheses as to how they originated. Design inferences appeal to past experiences with entities possessing order and complexity, and so are not mere analogies, but rather inductive arguments.

1. A Third Way? Science Between Evolution and ID. Lake Shore Room.

Lothar Schafer.

Darwinism and Intelligent Design in a Quantum Universe.

One of the great achievements of quantum physics is the discovery that physical reality is different than we always thought. At the foundation of ordinary things the quantum entities -- elementary particles, atoms and molecules -- can evolve in superpositions of states which are not quite real but "between the idea of a thing and a real thing" as Heisenberg described it; they can be meaningfully said to have mind-like properties; and they can influence each other instantaneously over arbitrarily long distances. In a universe that is a network of non-local, instantaneous connections; which exists in superpositions of tendencies for actual events to occur; and which, at its frontiers, does not fade into nothing, but into the transcendent -- the concept can be no longer maintained of evolution as a classical process that is driven by strictly local forces and the mechanical properties of dense Newtonian particles. We must expect that DNA molecules, like all quantum systems, evolve in superpositions of states, are subject to quantum non-locality, and are centers of systems of virtual molecular states, which are not quite real but can become real when they are populated. It is postulated that the virtual states of DNA correspond to possible life forms. Thus, each DNA system contains in its virtual states the future evolution of life which is possible but not necessary. In view of these considerations, those who try to explain evolution in terms of natural processes will have to redefine the meaning of that term, 'natural,' and in the end may even find it synonymous with what we now call intelligent; while those who propose the doctrine of intelligent design may find that their concepts are nothing but imaginative descriptors of the quantum nature of the universe.

Major new structures arise explosively in what I term form-making events. These have a long period of acquiring readiness, an explosive moment of radically reorganizing stock material, followed by a long period of evolution through modification. The Cambrian explosion followed by the evolution of multicellular life fits the schema of a form-making event.

The path of evolution is constrained by immutable elements; patterns of physical structures, metabolic and behavioral relationships, that cannot be changed when one species evolves into another. These conserved elements have some vital responsibility to the coherence of the organism.

Conserved elements are sometimes design compromises necessitated because earlier evolutionary decisions had carried the flow of events into a blind alley. The head for instance, is a compromise structure needed to overcome the slow workings of a chemical nervous system.

2. Is Intelligent Design Good Theology? HS 105.

Jay Richards.

Howard Van Till’s ‘Robust Formational Economy Principle’ as a Critique of Intelligent Design.

In this essay, I will describe, analyze and critique Howard Van Till’s

argument for the Robust Formational Economy Principle (RFEP). According

to RFEP, the universe's formational economy is fully capable of

organizing and transforming itself from elementary forms of matter into

all the physical and biological structures that it actually contains.

Van Till argues that the theist should expect RFEP to obtain in the

world, and that attempts by design theorists to deny it are misguided. I will argue, on the contrary, that Van Till's theological defense of RFEP is misguided.

Michael Horace Barnes.

Whether God Intervenes: The Theology of Karl Rahner.

Divine interventions are discussed by Dembski, but he argues that intelligent design arguments do not depend on belief in miracles. Johnson only hints at divine interventions, Behe less so. Nonetheless, they all reject a thorough naturalism, even if it is only methodological, as though belief in miracles were indeed quite important to them. The Jesuit Karl Rahner has a theology and accompanying spirituality that provide a non-interventionist view quite compatible with naturalism in science. If intelligent design proponents reject this theology and spirituality, as I suspect they will, the reasons they give for doing so may expose more of their presuppositions and concerns.

3. Irreducible Complexity in Biology. HS 011.

Joe Francis.

The Prokarytic Cell Division Apparatus; An Example of a Minimal Irreducibly Complex System Required for Cell Life?

The living cell is enormously complex. A great number of mechanisms in living cells appear to be irreducibly complex. At present, few adequate explanations exist for how irreducibly complex mechanisms could have evolved by Darwinian natural selection. It could be argued that given enough time a simple reproducing population of living protocells could have provided a format for the evolution of complex mechanisms. However, even the most basic cell functions of simple bacteria, display irreducibly complex mechanisms. For instance, cell division, one of the most fundamental cell processes required for life and natural selection displays irreducible complexity. The origin of a minimal irreducibly complex cell division apparatus is considered in light of Protocell theory and Intelligent design theory.

James Mattea.

Does Consciousness Do Something Which Nothing Else Can Do: Turing’s Test as a Mind Detector.

Bishop William Paley argued that, when one sees the functional order of

a watch, one may infer 'this was designed', that is, this is necessarily the product of a mind. If so, a mind must have abilities which enable it to uniquely create certain kinds of order. Alan Turing's test--posing questions to a hidden contestant who could be a computer or a human--is an updated operational test for the presence of a mind: are there problems which only a mind could solve, which would enable a Turing's questioner to discern the presence of a person? A problem-solver may solve a problem 1) without foreknowledge or intention of a solution (as in chance+external selection), 2) by following a set of rules which completely specify operations which will solve the problem (as in a computer algorithm), or 3) by anticipating a solution in a general way, then intuiting how a particular pattern satisfies this general anticipation ("serendipity"). I argue that when we see serendipitous problem solving, we see a mind at work. Serendipity demands: 1) a problem-solving agent which can synoptically witness many items taken together, 2) which can then intuit novel patterns in that which it witnesses, 3) which, in being immediately self-aware of its own activities, can spontaneously modify and correct those activities in response to particular novelties, 4) which can be aware of general and abstract criteria of a solution, 5) and which can spontaneously seek goals and then freely choose means which could realize them

- all of which abilities are the unique prerogative of an agent with a mind. When we observe the serendipitous emergence of novel functional order in nature, evolution, or human culture, we see mind at work.

Jim Rovira.

Kant, Design, Mind and Nature.

Immanuel Kant defined nature as it exists for the observing subject as the "sum of all appearances." Kant, in his search for certainty, abandons nature in favor of the logically necessary self, the self implied by our perceptions. Kant’s abandonment of nature is based upon the myth of the transcendental idea. This myth establishes Kant’s arguments against intelligent design and Dembski’s arguments for it. I argue for the humiliation of mind before nature and the abandonment of claims to logical certainty when we seek for signs of intelligent design in nature, especially as a proof for the existence of God.

Joon-Ha Hwang.

Supernatural Intervention: an Epistemic Support for Intelligent Design.

Whether an intelligent cause is located within or outside nature (i.e., is respectively natural or supernatural) is a separate question from whether an intelligent cause has acted within nature. Design has no prior commitment to supernaturalism. Consequently science can offer no principled grounds for excluding design or relegating it to religion.

But it is necessary to pursue scientific research freed from programmatic external philosophical constraints, particularly those associated with a materialist or naturalist agenda.

We can present many medically and scientifically confirmed cases of miracles through Rev. Dr. Lee Jae-Rock, which may be the actual evidences of the supernatural intervention. We cautiously propose that this may be the clue to the very supernatural power, the causation of the origin of life and all the complex specified information of the universe.

And we propose spiritual laws in addition to natural laws. Spiritual laws have preferential rights to natural laws because the spiritual realm is in the higher dimension than this world. When our faith is good enough by the measure of spiritual laws, our prayer can be responded supernaturally. For just God also observes the spiritual laws.

Our situation is not temporary or fortunate because the magnitude and the number of wonders and signs are increasing continuously. With the lapse of time we will have statistically more and more strong and high probability of miraculous cure that can rule out falsity, illusion or chance effectively.

I wish the scientifically confirmed evidence of supernatural intervention may provide new insights to scientists and contribute to the development of science by providing additional fruitful avenues of research to approach the truth.