Month: February 2006

Slumming at Talk.Origins (go here), I ran across the following remark in reference to the Ruse-Dennett Briefwechsel (discussed on this blog here): I wonder if Ruse has actually watched “The Root Of All Evil?”. And if childen were indoctrinated with the most extreme forms of racial bigotry by parents who were Nazis or supporters of […]

Frank Tipler co-authored a book with John Barrow entitled The Anthropic Cosmological Principle which was a peer-reviewed book published by Oxford University in 1987. The principle thesis: Intelligent information-processing must come into existence in the Universe, and, once it comes into existence, it will never die out. They derive the thesis from Schrodinger’s equation

Chicken will grow teeth when pigs can fly. Well, better start searching the skies for flying pork—scientists have discovered a mutant chicken with a full set of crocodile-like chompers. The mutant chick, called Talpid, also had severe limb defects and died before hatching. It was discovered 50 years ago, but no one had ever examined […]

As Michael Ruse remarked when he gave me permission to quote the following exchange between him and Daniel Dennett: “feel free to quote — after all, I am in deep sh** already!!!” HIGHLIGHT OF THE EXCHANGE: “I think that you and Richard [Dawkins] are absolute disasters in the fight against intelligent design – we are […]

I’ts hard to imagine a more exciting time to be participating in this discussion. Just the past 24 hours have brought some incredibly exciting exchanges and inside information, see here and here. But most entertaining of all is Eugenie Scott recruiting churches to defend Darwinism: Check this out. And this. So, Eugenie Scott wants to […]

I often see misunderstanding of what ID is about. It’s about inferring design by critical analysis of a pattern and the ways that pattern could have come to exist. I find a comparison with a lottery to be the easiest way to understand this.

Here’s an excerpt from the Statement: Science is a process of seeking natural explanations for natural phenomena. Scientists ask questions about the natural world, formulate hypotheses to answer the questions, and collect evidence or data with which to evaluate the hypotheses. Scientific theories are unified explanations of these phenomena supported by extensive testing and evidence. […]

[For more on this book, go here.]

I felt it appropriate to honor those who have stepped forward at the risk of their professions and reputations to stand up for free and open inquiry. I would like to also honor those who would wish to have their names put on the list today, but who must wait until the time is right. […]

The observed effects of random mutation plus natural selection can account for temporary changes in finch beak size, pigmentation changes in moths, and antibiotic resistance in bacteria. It has never been observed creating novel 1) cell types, 2) tissue types, 3) organs, or 4) body plans. All four of those creative events must be explained […]

Pat Hayes at Red State Rabble tries to present the face on Mars as an example in false positives equivalent to the appearance of design in cellular machinery. When will uncritical thinkers like Pat Hayes cop to the fact that seeing the Virgin Mary’s face in a tortilla is not the equivalent of seeing design […]

Myers says: Once upon a time, I was one of those nerds who hung around Radio Shack and played about with LEDs and resistors and capacitors; I know how to solder and I took my first old 8-bit computer apart and put it back together again with “improvements.” In grad school I was in a […]

Project Strawman Steve is nearing its 700th Steve and the Thumbsters are ecstatic.

No takers for the St. Charles side of a nuclear evolution debate. What a surprise!