Nature (yes, THAT Nature) News: Testing such ideas empirically will be extremely difficult. … But it may not be impossible. …
These guys are, by temperament, stuck with the intellectual life, which they understandably want to live and can no longer live under the constraints that cultural Darwinism requires.
Egnor: Jerry Fodor and Massimo Piatelli-Palmarini’s book What Darwin Got Wrong was published in 2010. Having read it now, perhaps belatedly, I can report that it is a masterpiece.
Science historian: Other atheists have believed in ghosts too, apparently.
I had the wonderful experience today, of visiting Westminster Abbey in London …
At Richard Dawkins’ s site.
The sheer unlikelihood of life coming to exist at all is not an argument for universal common descent; it is an argument for a non-random origin of life.
Tyler: In Crick’s case (and many like him), the philosophy is naturalism that is presented as the essence of science. The problem then is a close-minded dogmatism about the way the world works.
A bit of background to the Cornell OBI paper.
Origin of life researchers are at an impasse and willing to consider any thesis, including pure storytelling.
Suffice to say, Virginia Hughes, and Maia Szalavitz who “contributed much to the reporting and thinking behind this review” … have no idea what they are talking about and wouldn’t care if they did. They needn’t. They need only demonstrate enthusiasm for Darwinism.
“I completely agree that scientific progress has undermined our old animist beliefs and led to the disenchantment of the world.” Jules Evans I was thinking about that highlighted part, and my response is, “Well, yes and no.” Yes, if Evans is saying nothing more than that we no longer believe, for example, that fairies tangle […]
Jonathan Wells: So non-protein-coding regions of DNA that some previously regarded as “junk”turn out to encode biological information that greatly increases the known information-carrying capacity of DNA.
Jonathan Wells: Clearly, the notion of “junk DNA” is obsolete, and the amount of biological information in the genome far exceeds the information in protein-coding regions.