You noted that if Denton's new book represents a radical change of
perspective "we will see a star fall from the Young-earth heavens."
Here's a sample of what Denton has to say on that: (from p. xviii)
"Contrary to the creationist position, the whole argument presented here is
critically dependent on the presumption of the unbroken continuity of the
organic world--that is, on the reality of organic evolution and on the
presumption that all living organisms on earth are natural forms in the
profoundest sense of the word, no less natural than salt crystals, atoms,
waterfalls, or galaxies."
"In large measure, therefore, the teleological argument presented here and
the special creationist worldview are mutually exclusive accounts of the
world. In the last analysis, evidence for one is evidence against the
other. Put simply, the more convincing is the evidence for believing that
the world is prefabricated to the end of life, that the design is built
into the laws of nature, the less credible becomes the special creationist
worldview."
By the way, I'm still interested in hearing the judgment of biologists
regarding Denton's concept of 'directed evolution.' Denton's position is
largely a *teleological interpretation* of the character of the universe's
functional and formational economies, but it should, I believe, be
evaluated also for its scientific merit, or lack thereof.
Howard Van Till