“Investigation of the logic of regulatory and information¬-processing systems in cells will reveal the use of design strategies and logic that mirrors (though possibly exceeds in complexity) those used in systems designed by engineers. Cell biologists will find regulatory systems that function in accord with a logic that can be expressed as an algorithm.”
A common feature of ID literature is the discussion of analogies between human-designed systems and biological systems. Indeed, the similarities are remarkable in many ways. This prediction foresees more of the same. It follows from the claim that just as complex specified information in non-biological systems is always the result of an intelligent agent such as humans, then complex specified information in the biological system is also the result of an intelligent agent. The obvious corollary is that the design strategy and logic embedded in that information is very similar.
The term “mirror” isn’t defined by Meyer and it isn’t clear how closely the two systems need to match in order to either verify or negate the prediction. What if 90% of the strategies are mirrored? 80%? What if a design strategy is found that isn’t mirrored? Is that enough to negate the prediction? Who’s the arbiter to determine what a design strategy is?
The reference to algorithms is puzzling. Is the implication that only systems that are the product of an intelligent agent can function in accord with a logic that can be expressed in an algorithm? How is this a useful prediction of ID?
It seems that this is a prediction that will be true, no matter whether ID is true or not.