2011

In previous articles, I have argued that even if our universe is part of some larger multiverse, we still have excellent scientific grounds for believing that our universe – and also the multiverse in which it is embedded – is fine-tuned to permit the possibility of life. Moreover, the only adequate explanation for the extraordinary degree of fine-tuning we observe in the cosmos is that it is the product of an Intelligence. That is the cosmological fine-tuning argument, in a nutshell. My articles can be viewed here:

So you think the multiverse refutes cosmological fine-tuning? Consider Arthur Rubinstein
Beauty and the multiverse
Why a multiverse would still need to be fine-tuned, in order to make baby universes

Scientific challenges to the cosmological fine-tuning argument can be ably rebutted, as this article by Dr. Robin Collins shows. However, there are three objections to fine-tuning which I keep hearing from atheists over and over again. Here they are:
Read More ›

Here johnnyb talks about “Intelligent Design and the Education Crisis,” assuring us, “No I’m Not Talking About Evolution Today”. No need, johnnyb. I used to work in educational publishing, and heartily agree with this: Want to start a revolution in education? Start by looking at what motivates kids to love learning. Money can motivate kids to *do* the work, but that’s not what education is. Loving learning is what will make kids educated, whether they go through college or not. None of the standardized tests will tell you if your child loves learning. None of them will say, “this person wants to get to the bottom of things, and won’t stop until he finds it.” But here are some problems: Read More ›

Here. Ryan Schaffer interviews Leo Behe, who hopes to study philosophy in the fall term: I’m going to a university this fall to study philosophy. In the future, I hope to write on the subject of religion and why I believe it is both harmful and false. – (“The Humanist Interview: The son of intelligent design heavyweight Michael Behe discusses his journey to atheism” The Humanist, September/October 2011) That said, he does not claim that his father forced religion on him. Rather, I would like everyone to realize that he doesn’t have any sort of religious agenda and he’s not trying to denigrate science in any way. And so … Long-held beliefs, especially beliefs developed during childhood, operate on a Read More ›

At BBC News (August 27, 2011), Pallab Ghosh reports “LHC results put supersymmetry theory ‘on the spot’” : Results from the Large Hadron Collider (LHC) have all but killed the simplest version of an enticing theory of sub-atomic physics. Researchers failed to find evidence of so-called “supersymmetric” particles, which many physicists had hoped would plug holes in the current theory. Promising: “The fact that we haven’t seen any evidence of it tells us that either our understanding of it is incomplete, or it’s a little different to what we thought – or maybe it doesn’t exist at all,” he said. Relax, Nash. If you’re willing to admit that maybe it doesn’t exist at all, you know you are doing physics. Read More ›

(Of a series of seven) The Washington Post’s Paula Kirby unintentionally forces the first question. Kirby sounds like an utterly conventional legacy media journalist, a woman who would never have an idea that wasn’t trendy. She read a book by Dawkins and then one by Jerry Coyne and, guess what, she knows evolution is true. Period. Responding to Rick Perry’s claimed position on evolution, she explains (“Evolution threatens Christianity,”Washington Post, August 24, 2011) why she stopped being a Christian because of evolution (= Darwinism): But of course evolution poses a problem for Christianity. That’s not to say it poses a problem for all Christians, since many Christians happily accept evolution: they see Genesis 1 as merely a metaphor, and declare Read More ›

From “Mysterious Fossils Provide New Clues to Insect Evolution” (ScienceDaily, Aug. 15, 2011) , we learn: Scientists at the Stuttgart Natural History Museum and colleagues have discovered a new insect order from the Lower Cretaceous of South America. Though thought to be mayflies, Coxoplectoptera, however, significantly differ from both mayflies and all other known insects in anatomy and mode of life. The peculiar larvae, however, are reminiscent of freshwater shrimps. Their lifestyle turned out to be a major enigma: their mode of embedding and certain other characteristics clearly suggest a fluvial habitat. Their unique anatomy indicates that these animals were ambush predators living partly dug in the river bed. If so, all this raises another evolution conundrum: Darwinism (natural selection Read More ›

A while back, I wrote a note on how a government can gain control of the Internet (by criminalizing the hyperlink). Here’s another way: By making new rules that discriminate against blogs, vs. other sources of news. That’ exactly what the Canadian province of Quebec proposes, according to Franklin Carter at the Book and Periodical Council’s Freedom of Expression Committee: In Quebec, Culture Minister Christine St-Pierre is proposing to create “a new model of regulation of Quebec media.” Public consultations will be held across Quebec this fall. She wishes to distinguish in law between “professional journalists” who are committed to “serving the public interest” and “amateur bloggers.” State-recognized professional journalists would enjoy unspecified “advantages or privileges” over other writers and Read More ›

This Spiked interview by Tim Black with Raymond Tallis might be useful reading: This sense that our minds are not what we thought they were, that it’s our brains, and the natural-physical causal network of which they are part, that is really calling the shots has been lovingly embraced by politicos on both sides of the Atlantic. It’s a development that worries Tallis: ‘That’s when [neuromania] gets dangerous rather than merely irritating – when people start invoking brain science as a guide to social policy, as a guide to understanding criminal behaviour and so on. You’re then in the same territory as Cesare Lombroso [a nineteenth-century criminologist who believed criminality was physically inherited] and other characters who have since been Read More ›

Education is one of the things that nearly every American agrees is important. I am one of those people. I do everything in my power to give my children every educational opportunity. I was well-pleased with my education choices when, today in my child’s 3rd-grade class, the teacher turned on some music, and half of the children were excited because it was Beethoven, and they each spontaneously told which Beethoven piece was their favorite.

However, to educate properly, the primary principle that you must operate with is this – education needs to be sensitive to the nature of humans. If your educational philosophy or your political philosophy of education fails to take into account the nature of humans and how they learn, the final result will be that you spend a whole lot of money, and no one gets educated. That’ pretty much sums up where we are headed.
Read More ›

It is now clear that the two essential foundations of Darwinian speculation are in a state of complete evidential and combinatorial mathematical collapse. The first foundation of Darwinian speculation is gradualism, which is nowhere to be found in the fossil record, unless one has an incredibly creative imagination and a propensity for making up unsubstantiated stories. The second foundation of Darwinian speculation is that random errors can produce highly sophisticated computer code. This is transparently absurd and illogical. It is really pathetic, when one thinks about it, that so many intellectual and investigative resources have been squandered on what is now known to be complete nonsense. Many brilliant people, who could have done something productive and creative with their lives, Read More ›

Leaving ID theorists with a blank slate to deal with, instead of a horde of bawling trolls? In “Of Course: NYT Editor Suddenly Very Interested in Candidates’ Churches” (Townhall , August 25, 2011 ), Guy Benson notes, We have an unusually large number of candidates, including putative front-runners, who belong to churches that are mysterious or suspect to many Americans. Mitt Romney and Jon Huntsman are Mormons, a faith that many conservative Christians have been taught is a “cult” and that many others think is just weird. (Huntsman says he is not “overly religious.”) Rick Perry, Michele Bachmann and Rick Santorum are all affiliated with fervid subsets of evangelical Christianity, which has raised concerns about their respect for the separation Read More ›