Behe’s focus and where he finds major problems with chance and necessity is in nano-molecular cellular machinery rather than the gross anatomical level such as scales becoming feathers or limbs turning into wings. That is also where I find the NeoDarwinian explanations most deficient. In that context could someone please describe for me the “dynamic fitness landscape” that could drive the evolution of this: Good luck.
Dirty snow may warm Arctic as much as greenhouse gases
“In the past two centuries, the Arctic has warmed about 1.6 degrees. Dirty snow caused .5 to 1.5 degrees of warming, or up to 94 percent of the observed change, the scientists determined.” Read More ›
UD Subscriber Magnan pinches his nose closed long enough to fisk Mark Chu-Carrol’s vitriolic spittle strewn imbecilic diatribe “review” of Michael Behe’s new book The Edge of Evolution: The Search for the Limits of Darwinism in a comment here. I reproduce it in its entirety. Now that someone has responded to it point by point I hope those who have been losing sleep over it can get some rest. Read More ›
I’ve just seen the Publisher’s Weekly review of Montreal neuroscientist Mario Beauregard’s and my book, The Spiritual Brain: A Neuroscientist’s Case for the Existence of the Soul:
Following C. S. Lewis’s dictum that “to ‘see through’ all things is the same as not to see,†neuroscientist Beauregard and journalist O’Leary mount a sweeping critique of a trend in “the pop science media†to explain away religious experience as a brain artifact, pathology, or evolutionary quirk. While sympathizing with the attraction such “neurotheology†holds, the authors warn against the temptation to force the complex varieties of human spirituality into simplistic categories that they argue are conceptually crude, culturally biased, and often empirically untested. In recently published research using Carmelite nuns as subjects, Beauregard’s group at the University of Montreal found specific areas of brain activation associated with contemplative prayer. But these patterns are quite distinct from those associated with hallucinations, autosuggestion, or states of intense emotional arousal, resembling instead how the brain processes “real†experiences. Insisting that “we have never entertained the idea of proving the existence of God,†the authors concede that “the results of our work are assumed to be a strike either for or against God†and that “on the whole, we [don’t] mind.†Never shrinking from controversy, and sometimes deliberately provoking it, this book serves as a lively introduction to a field where neuroscience, philosophy, and secular/spiritual cultural wars are unavoidably intermingled. (Sept.)
It was great that the reviewer homed in on some of what Mario and I are trying to do – expose the sheer shoddiness of so much materialist thinking in neuroscience in the area of spirituality. Read More ›
New Textbook Seeks to Improve Teaching of Evolution as reported by Rob Crowther. “Explore Evolution brings to the classroom data and debates that already are raised regularly by scientists in their science journals,†emphasized science education policy analyst Casey Luskin, M.S., J.D. “Exposure to these real-world scientific debates will make the study of evolution more interesting to students, and it will train them to be better scientists by encouraging them to actually practice the kind of critical thinking and analysis that forms the heart of science.†Co-authored by two state university biology professors, two philosophers of science, and a science curriculum writer, Explore Evolution was peer-reviewed by biology faculty at both state and private universities, teachers with experience in both Read More ›
There have been a few limited skirmishes in Virginia over ID in the universities. Up until now the public school issue has been quiet. But are things set to change?
Ed Brayton brought this article to my attention: Evolution vs. Intelligent Design
How were the oceans, puppies and human beings formed? Was it through evolution, creationism or something in between?
It’s a heavy topic that’s generated debate for years. That discourse landed in Chesterfield School Board members’ laps…
Intelligent design proponents urged the School Board to include that theory in the school system’s science curriculum so students can consider differing viewpoints in the classroom. But, federal law requires school systems to remain neutral on the topic, making it illegal for teachers to prompt discussions involving intelligent design or creationism.
Ted Davis, a historian of science who has often spoken against the ID guys, has weighed in heavily on the side of Guillermo Gonzalez in the recent tenure denial scandal: From where I sit, the impact of Dr. Avalos’[*] deeds is not hard to see: he poisoned the environment for Dr. Gonzalez, by undermining his academic reputation and isolating him at Iowa State*and all based on a book that is actually one of the best popular books about science in recent years. I am an expert on the history of religion and science in the United States (my current project on modern America has received significant support from the National Science Foundation), and in my opinion Dr. Gonzalez’ treatment of Read More ›
In a review of David Sloan Wilson’s book for popular audiences: Evolution for Everyone: How Darwin’s Theory Can Change the Way We Think About Our Lives, Mark Pagel, an evolutionary biologist, gives an unwitting slam of Darwinism. The review was published in the prestigious scientific journal Nature.
we discover that 54% of adults in the United States prefer to believe that humans did not evolve from some earlier species. What makes this figure surprising is that it is up from 46% in 1994.
The number of non-Darwinists is rising! Pagel then asks this rhetorical question, “Where have the evolutionists gone wrong?”
Read More ›
The following poem entitled “First they came…” is inscribed at the Boston Holocaust Memorial. Those who believe Guillermo Gonzalez’ involvement with ID outside the Iowa State campus can be justly used in consideration of whether or not to grant him tenure would be well served to think about this. First they came… They came first for the Communists, and I didn’t speak up because I wasn’t a Communist. Then they came for the Jews, and I didn’t speak up because I wasn’t a Jew. Then they came for the trade unionists, and I didn’t speak up because I wasn’t a trade unionist. Then they came for the Catholics, and I didn’t speak up because I was a Protestant. Then they Read More ›
Recently, someone from Europe (who says he is “very sceptical of intelligent design theory”) drew my attention to a “horrible” article he found in the Google cache.* Read More ›
Well, John Berman’s ABC report “Hello, How Are You Doing?: Groundbreaking Research Has Scientists Talking with Apes” certainly sounded groundbreaking. The bonobos and orangutans at the Great Ape Trust in Des Moines, Iowa, are said to “talk”*, using a 350 symbol keyboard on which they have been trained since infancy. One ofthem, a 26-year-old Bonobo, Kanzi, is the star: He can map a series of English words to symbols on the keyboard. But then, it all fell apart during Berman’s “interview” with the ape: Read More ›
The latest edition of the german journal “Religion-Staat-Gesellschaft/Journal for the Study of Beliefs and Worldviews” (Jg.7 (2006), Nr.2) holds the focus on Intelligent Design & Evolution. ID-proponents and evolution-critics got a good chance to present and defend their viewpoints. Although the journal is dedicated to the study of worldviews and their roles in society there was also space to present scientific arguments and facts. The broad content includes a sociological analysis concerning the (largely negative) media coverage of ID in the german speaking area (Schmidt) and even a direct debate between ID-proponents (Lönnig/Meis) and critics (Gutmann/Warnecke). Papers Robert Schmidt, “Götter und Designer bleiben draußen” – Eine kritische Diskursanalyse der Medienberichterstattung zu Intelligent Design im deutschsprachigen Raum p135-184 Hans Peter Comes, Read More ›
Robert J. Marks II (see biosketch below) has just put his new Evolutionary Informatics Lab online: ecs.baylor.edu/faculty/marks/Research/EILab Here is how the lab is described on the website: Evolutionary informatics merges theories of evolution and information, thereby wedding the natural, engineering, and mathematical sciences. Evolutionary informatics studies how evolving systems incorporate, transform, and export information. Baylor University’s Evolutionary Informatics Laboratory explores the conceptual foundations, mathematical development, and empirical application of evolutionary informatics. The principal theme of the lab’s research is teasing apart the respective roles of internally generated and externally applied information in the performance of evolutionary systems. On the evolutionary informatics site are three papers jointly authored by Prof. Marks and me, with more are in the works. BIOSKETCH: Robert Read More ›
Details HERE How accurate were the predictions of Dr. Ivan A. Conway Moore, Ph.E., Thomas Huxley Professor of Pugilistic Ideology at Iowa State University? Read More Moore…
…we’ll deny tenure to anyone who wants to pursue the ideas, or develop them to the point where they can make predictions. If that sounds like a Catch-22, it is. Iowa State University Professor of Physics John Hauptman explains his No vote on Guillermo Gonzalez’s tenure decision as a simple matter: intelligent design isn’t science. Hauptman liked Gonzalez as a colleague: He is very creative, intelligent and knowledgeable, highly productive scientifically and an excellent teacher. Students in my Newspaper Physics class like to interview him. None of that counts, however, as Hauptman sees it. Rather what counts is the definition of “science.” Intelligent design, which Hauptman compares to the ancients attributing the growth of grain to the god Ceres, just Read More ›