We’ve recently been discussing whether Berkeley law professor Phil Johnson (author of Darwin on Trial) is ill-informed on biology. Click here to continue reading>>>

In any debate, it is good strategy to acknowledge your opponent’s strongest points up front, effectively taking them off the table. Critics of Intelligent Design have two strong arguments, discussed below, and virtually nothing else. Direct evidence that natural selection or any other unintelligent cause can actually do intelligent things, like design plants or animals, is nonexistent. The first argument is this: in every other field of science, methodological naturalism has been spectacularly successful, why should evolutionary biology be different? Evolutionary biologists understandably don’t want to be the only scientists at scientific meetings appealing to the workings of an unseen intelligent agent to explain phenomena in their field of study. When we have an approach that has worked so well Read More ›

Tel Aviv’s Eva Jablonka and Snait Gissis have a new volume out, courtesy of MIT Press, on the resurgence of Lamarckism which is, as Oxford’s Denis Noble notes, long overdue:  Read more