Abstract
Venema's (PSCF 62, no. 4 [2010]: 276–83) "scientific critique" of Stephen Meyer's book, Signature in the Cell, fails to come to grips with Meyer's main thesis, which is that an unplanned nature is impotent in the generation of the information contained within the first cell. Certainly, random mutation linked to a selector such as natural selection can produce functional information, but is such information sufficient? Since God may superintend nature, the scientific question is this: Does an unplanned nature have the potential to generate the information contained within the first cell?