2012

The title of this PhysOrg news summary really tells us all we need to know about the neo-Darwin/ID debate. Tacitly included is the assumption that only via known physical and mathematical laws can biologists attain an understanding of this particular ‘adaptation.’ This then would require that NS, via the ‘environment and climate change’ is able to produce innovations consistent with laws that were only discovered millions of years later. How is this possible? This can only become possible if the ‘environment’ is interacting with something that is capable of encoding and producing some form of mathematical/physical knowledge or information. This in turn begs the question: where did this ‘knowledge’ or mathematico/physico ‘information’ come from? Can we, in an intellectually honest Read More ›

In his book Inside the Human Genome Evolution professor John Avise makes the usual evolutionary truth claims that biological designs make “no (theo)logical sense” and “defy notions of a supreme intelligence.” The biological designs, in this case, are those involved in the mitochondria’s cellular energy production. Avise writes:  Read more

Suppose your enemy is trying to frame you for murder.  He does a good job of fabricating evidence, and you are arrested and charges are filed.  Of course you are not guilty, so you refuse all plea offers.  But being innocent does not guaranty you will win at trial, and your “no plea” position is very risky.  Indeed, the stakes could not be higher.  Under the law of your state the only allowable penalty for murder is life in prison without possibility of parole.  Your case goes to trial, and the DA’s entire case against you comes down to the testimony of two witnesses.  Even though you are not guilty, it is clear to everyone that if either of these witnesses Read More ›

This is your last chance to come and participate in the Engineering and Metaphysics conference. The conference, located in Tulsa, Oklahoma, begins on Friday. If you’re in the area, come on by! However, it is best to preregister to make sure that we have enough conference packets and meals for everyone. See the website to register and for more information, including a list of talks. Several UD authors are presenting talks. While it is not an ID-specific conference, several talks are on ID-related topics. Check it out today!

We have seen that an evolution professor and member of the National Academy of Sciences, John Avise, argued that the evolution of the species isnot by chance and that the evolution of complexity is not a problem because high fitness, point mutations are fixed in populations of bacteria in a test tube. You might think that such erroneous claims must be one-time blunders—mistakes that would be quickly retracted when pointed out. But this is not the case. These are standard evolutionary arguments. Avise’s book was endorsed by several evolutionists, and when I pointed out these enormous blunders other evolutionists rushed to his defense. Fallacious thinking is fundamental to evolutionary thought. But why? After all, evolutionists such as Avise are certainly not intellectually lacking. Read More ›