Uncommon Descent Serving The Intelligent Design Community

NOTICE, in response to attempts to play the “the God of the OT is a moral monster” distractive rhetorical games

Earlier today, I have had to deal with an attempt by a commenter who — for cause — was already of an ilk I have asked not to comment on threads I post here at UD, as such are simply rudely disruptive and distractive; making no genuinely positive contribution to serious dialogue. Given his insistence on being further disruptive, I was forced to shut down comments for the thread. I have taken time at my personal blog, to respond for record to the cluster of issues raised in that earlier post, and have placed as a footnote to the original post, the following: I have further explained what is going on, here, highlighting the implicit, enabling antisemitic significance of attacking Read More ›

Responding to some hate-mail

Here, as provoked by this recent UD post. Unfortunately, aptly illustrating this. END ___________ F/N: I have further explained what is going on, here, highlighting the implicit, enabling antisemitic significance of attacking the God of the Bible as a “bronze age tribal deity” and “moral monster,” by playing at Bible difficulties games as distractors from uncomfortable issues for new atheists — and yes, Dr Dawkins and co, this explicitly involves you; for the God of the Old Testament you decry in your notorious passage is quite plainly the God of Israel. You therefore have some explaining to do, at minimum for enabling anti-semitism as well as anti-Christian bigotry and bashing. I have also provided a cluster of ten initial links Read More ›

Independent Intron Insertion: More Evidence for Common Mechanism

It is perhaps the most celebrated evolutionary evidence from the genomics era. Like a grammar school teacher who knows cheating occurred when he sees identical typos in essays from different students, evolutionists know common descent occurred when they see identical junk DNA (yes we know the junk DNA often seems to be found to be functional, but that’s a different story) in the genomes of different species. In what philosopher Elliott Sober has called Modus Darwin, evolutionists reason that only evolution can account for these so-called shared errors. But is the premise true? Can only evolution account for such observations? (yes we know the evolutionary reasoning is, as usual, not scientific, but that’s a different story).  Read more