Isn’t it utterly awe-inspiring to look at the sheer vastness of the Universe we inhabit? Atheists have often argued that the immense grandeur of the cosmic arena renders mankind unlikely to have a significant role in the grand scheme of things.

But what if the preponderance of evidence told quite a different story?

Read More ›

In relentless pursuit of evidence that animals think like people, Science publishes “Do Tayras Plan for the Future?” by Helen Fields (5 August 2011):

Humans buy unripe bananas, then leave them on the kitchen counter. The tayra, a relative of the weasel native to Central and South America, appears to do much the same thing, picking unripe plantains and hiding them until they ripen, according to a new study. The authors speculate that tayras are showing a human-like capacity to plan for the future, which has previously been shown only in primates and birds.

The problem is, Read More ›

Hi UncommonDescent Readers: I have a request. I need one or more freelance writers to work for pay on short research articles (ca. 1000 to 3000 words) related to higher-ed. Some of this work will touch on ID but most will not. Contact me at the email address on the homepage of www.designinference.com to learn more. –Bill D.

In response to my last post here, Faded Glory writes:  “But Barry, the way the design inference is formulated, it is not limited to a particular example like the one you present here. It is presented as a very general rule, as per your earlier post.” This statement is simply false.  ID never asks “What is the source of all design?”  It asks, “Is this particular thing designed?”  And it answers this question by determining whether that particular thing exhibits complex specified information (or irreducible complexity, which is a subset of CSI). Faded Glory writes:  “The moment someone uses the inference, in a non-controversial, way like your concrete example, anyone is warranted use exactly the same inference on any other Read More ›