The academic response to the evidence for Intelligent Design and a recent creation
From the books and articles I have read the consistent pattern has been dismissive with little if any evidence that the writers involved have read or responded to any of the recently produced materials published by the intelligent design movement or creation scientists. The following is a list of books and articles I have read which were aimed at defending neo-Darwinian evolution and rejecting intelligent design and creationism, with a short summary of the extent of the research into intelligent design and creation science that these authors have demonstrated, either through bibliographies, footnotes or from the work itself.
Alexander, Denis, Creation or Evolution (2008)
Limited evidence as no creationist literature was directly quoted whereas ID work by Dembski and Behe was quoted.
Coyne, Jerry A. Why Evolution is True (Oxford University Press, 2009)
Limited reference to any books being read and only one reference to attending a creationist lecture (p51).
Dawkins, Richard, The Greatest Show on Earth (Black Swan, 2009)
No evidence of having read any creationist books however some evidence in the footnotes of engagement with some selected creationist website articles.
Montgomery, David R. The Rocks Don’t Lie (W.W. Norton & Company, 2012)
The only creationist book mentioned in the bibliography, which was engaged with, was the ‘Genesis Flood’ published 1961.
National Academy of Sciences, Science and Creationism (National Academy Press, 1999)
Their understanding of creationist arguments suggests a very limited knowledge of the literature produced by creation scientists.
Peters, Ted & Hewlett, Martinez, Evolution from Creation to New Creation (Abingdon Press, 2003)
Some evidence of research with a number of works produced by Henry Morris being cited and works by Ken Ham, Duane Gish and Bill Cooper referred to - however the most recent of these publication is 1996 and since then the most interesting evidence has been discovered eg Soft tissue and carbon 14 in fossils, no junk DNA, genetic entropy etc,
Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, Creationism (2003 & 2014)
Bibliography contains only two books written by creationists: 'The Genesis Flood’ by Whitcomb and Morris published in 1961 and ‘Evolution: The Fossils say No’ by Duane Gish published in 1973.
Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, Science and Pseudo-science (2008 & 2017)
Bibliography contains no reference to books written by creationists even though it equates creationism with holocaust denial.
I have recently come across a book, The Grand Canyon - Monument to an Ancient Earth (2016) that did attempt to directly address issues raised by creation scientists which I appreciated. The following article is a detailed response to this book - in summary when I checked with the most reputable creation websites (Answers in Genesis, Creation Ministries International and Institute for Creation Research) there were articles addressing all the issues raised in the book. Furthermore, the main problems with an ancient earth were not covered eg irreducible complexity and genetic entropy in biology and soft tissue in fossils with regard to the age of the rocks. https://docs.google.com/document/d/e/2PACX-1vTup9eUFDNr8qnV5PVTgDbDrAktHnweGMWc-mvSCYPSt_JpzCDwTXXjwAB0J0tzi4MYnkN4l5sRsBNM/pub
This lack of engagement by the academic community can be best summed up by John Sanford, a very senior geneticist, who has only recently come to the conclusion that a recent creation is the correct way to understand the evidence. In the fourth edition of Genetic Entropy (2014) published almost ten years after the first edition (2005) Sanford asks the following question: ‘Nine years have passed since the first edition of Genetic Entropy. How has the book fared? … From the scientists in the field who are qualified to respond - I have only heard deafening silence.’ (p239)