Remember how you learned in tenth grade that evolution is a fact because bacteria develop resistance to antibiotics, and how evolutionists continue to proclaim this proof? Of course this evidence never explained how the bacteria could turn into a fish, or how the fish could turn into a giraffe. Nor did it explain how the bacteria evolved in the first place. The evidence didn’t even explain how the bacteria were able to respond so quickly to the antibiotics. Well if the whole argument wasn’t silly enough, now new research finds that drug resistance is actually an ancient trait because it was discovered in bacteria from an isolated cave in New Mexico, hundreds of yards underground:  Read more

It turns out the Time magazine cover “How to Survive the Coming Ice Age” is a photoshopped fake.  However, while the cover is a fake, Time was in fact printing stories about fears of global cooling in the 70’s.  See here.  And so was Newsweek. See here.  And the National Science Board.  See here.  And Science.  See here.  And several other sources summarized here.  We regret the error of putting the fake Time cover up.  However, the point we were trying to make remains valid.

Biology’s designs don’t fit the evolutionary tree very well. Evolutionists expected the species to form, more or less, a common-descent type pattern. Species that are supposed to share a recent common ancestor would be highly similar with only minor differences. And on the other hand, species whose last common ancestor is ancient would be more dramatically different. Sister species could not have any dramatic differences, and distant species could not share unlikely designs that would not have been present in the distant common ancestor. These evolutionary expectations have been falsified many times over. And these failures of evolutionary theory are far greater than any evolutionary “noise.” But such failures do not cast doubt on the theory of evolution itself. This Read More ›

The quest for the Higgs boson has been headline news in the world’s media, perhaps owing more to its nickname (the “God particle”) than to public understanding of why it is so significant. What is not in doubt is that this attention is good for physics and good for science. With so much attention given to technology exploitation, it is important to remind ourselves that fundamental science provides the foundations for advances in technology – and we still need blue-sky research. The excitement surrounding the Higgs boson stimulated a reflective essay in Nature from science writer Heidi Ledford. The question she addresses is: “What fundamental discoveries in biology might inspire the same thrill?” “We put the question to experts in Read More ›

I passed by and noticed Gil’s go-to-the heart-of-the-matter comment on the “a picture is worth . . . “ thread: The worst part is that these clowns are destroying public trust in legitimate science. As usual, Gil has gone straight to the key point. When science and science education as well as popular science and science-related journalism are ideologised and made into little more than agenda talking points, sooner or later, science is going to pay the price for the ideologues we can see dressing themselves up in the holy lab coat and demanding genuflection before their favourite myths. (And of course, predictably, they will try to twist the issue about, and accuse those who challenge them of being “anti Read More ›

People need to earn money but not at the expense of one’s profession. Each profession has its own methods and practices that must be followed. In the newspaper business it is understood that reporting must be accurate. And when mistakes occur, then corrections are made. No serious newspaper allows inaccurate or biased reporting to go uncorrected. It just doesn’t happen. Therefore the Los Angeles Times needs to issue a correction to its erroneous reporting on Tennessee’s new Academic Freedom measure. Here is my letter to the Times apprising them of this situation:  Read more