COMMENT: Intelligent design focuses on evidence, fills in origin gaps October 10, 2005 BY BRIAN FAHLING Dover, Pa., finds itself in the national spotlight as the putative successor to Dayton, Tenn., the rural community where the 1925 Scopes Monkey Trial played out on the national stage. . . . [For full article go here: http://www.freep.com/voices/columnists/efahling10e_20051010.htm.]
Backing Intelligent Design, Some Try to Oust Darwin
Debate on Campus Mirrors National Controversy Over How to Explain the Origin of Life on EarthBY Cristina Bautista
Read More ›
Contribution Writer
Monday, October 10, 2005
http://people.howstuffworks.com/intelligent-design.htm/printable
The Nobel Prize in medicine this year is for the discovery of H. pylori‘s role in ulcers. The scientific community’s reception of this discovery should give us pause about the continuing controversy over ID. When Robin Warren and Barry Marshall first claimed that the bacterium Helicobacter pylori plays a key role in the development of both stomach and intestinal ulcers, they were roundly ridiculed. So much so that Marshall actually infected himself to prove the point: Dr Marshall proved that H. pylori caused gastic inflammation by deliberately infecting himself with the bacterium. The Nobel citation praises the doctors for their tenacity, and willingness to challenge prevailing dogmas. . . . [At the time] stress and lifestyle were considered the major Read More ›
Attacking ID has become an academic growth industry. See, for instance, here. Where would Rob Pennock’s career be without ID?
Every now and again we need to be reminded of past events:
. . . The letter accuses Beckwith of holding church-state positions contrary to the strong stand for separation advocated by J.M. Dawson. Therefore, he should not be a leader of the Dawson Institute, it notes.
“We are troubled because Dr. Beckwith is a fellow of the Discovery Institute.
Read More ›
U of I president: teach only evolution in science classes
By JOHN MILLER, Associated Press Writer, The Associated Press October 05, 2005
University of Idaho President Tim White has entered the debate pitting Charles Darwin’s theories of life against religious-based alternatives by forbidding anything other than evolution from being taught in the Moscow school’s life, earth and physical science classes.
White’s edict came as a U of I biologist, Scott Minnich, a supporter of the “intelligent design” theory, was set to testify in a Pennsylvania lawsuit
Read More ›
CAN A JEW BE BANNED FOR SUPPORTING EVOLUTION IN THE 21st CENTURY?
FOR MORE INFORMATION:
CONTACT JULIE LEVENTHAL (202-363-6422, marketing@momentmag.com)
OR LISA NEWMAN (202-607-5472, lnewman@momentmag.com)OCTOBER 6, 2005 — Can a Jew be banned for supporting evolution in the 21st Century?
The answer, shockingly, is yes. Read More ›
I was out of pocket for a few days — hence the irregularity of postings and moderation of comments. –WmAD
There an interesting piece in The American Scientist by Pat Shipman on how best to swat down ID. It’s interesting not because its arguments against ID or on behalf of evolution are strong, but because of the psychology it portrays: panic, damage control, and denial (the denial being that there might be anything fundamentally amiss with conventional evolutionary theory). As you read it, think of the cigarette companies 50 years ago attempting to swat down claims that cigarette smoking is dangerous to your health. Shipman is a company man to the core, representing vested interests that have everything to lose. Read More ›
The following story, based largely on my interview with the local reporter on the Dover case (Lauri Lebo), doesn’t get an A for coherence or nuance, but I’m glad she got this point right: Dembski wrote, “In the words of Vladimir Lenin, What is to be done? Design theorists aren’t at all bashful about answering this question: The ground rules of science have to be changed.” Dembski said the remarks should be taken in historical context. “Science does not spring from Zeus’ head like Athena,” he said. He defends the movement to change the definition of science because the scientific method, which limits research to the natural world, has evolved in the past and will likely change in the future. Read More ›
The October issue of the WEB-ZINE “Anti TRIZ-journal” has been posted at http://www3.sympatico.ca/karasik. The issue is mostly devoted to the patterns of technological evolution as well as to Mr. Dembski’s challenge. Actually, you’ll do better to see my challenge met by looking at the comments/contest entries under https://uncommondescent.com/index.php/archives/341.
Go to http://idea.berkeley.edu for the new website for UC Berkeley’s IDEA Club (IDEA = Intelligent Design & Evolution Awareness): For too long the students have been dogmatically told that ID is just pseudo-scientific religious dogma. This website will offer Berkeley students accurate information on what ID is and is not. When students realize that ID does have scientific content behind the unfortunate politics, they will realize that the critics of ID on this campus are just arguing against themselves based on strawmen arguments. Their characterization of ID as “creationism in a cheap tuxedo” will only work if the students don’t read the ID material for themselves. It seems that incredulously asserting that ID theorists are bad scientists also works well Read More ›
To Debate or Not to Debate Intelligent Design?
By Gerald GraffWhen I heard that advocates of “Intelligent Design” were urging schools to “teach the controversy” between their view and Darwinian evolution, I was dismayed.
About 20 years ago, I coined the phrase “teach the controversy” when I argued that schools and colleges should respond to the then-emerging culture wars over education by bringing their disputes into academic courses themselves. . . . Read More ›
The Wars Over Evolution By Richard C. Lewontin New York Review of Books Volume 52, Number 16 · October 20, 2005 The Evolution-Creation Struggle by Michael Ruse Harvard University Press, 327 pp., $25.95 Not By Genes Alone: How Culture Transformed Human Evolution by Peter J. Richerson and Robert Boyd University of Chicago Press, 332 pp. $30.00 http://www.nybooks.com/articles/18363 “… Maybe God is lurking out there somewhere but He doesn’t leave any residue in our test tube, so we will be tempted to assume He doesn’t exist. This is a philosopher’s worry that does not, as far as I can tell, correspond to the way people really acquire their views of reality. Some may have had mountaintop conversions at some point in Read More ›