Genetics: 70% of published genetic sequence comparisons are not publicly accessible?
Science journalist Michael Shermer would like to have a beer with Alfred Russel Wallace. But would Wallace decline?
Nature article: Tut. Tut. Mustn’t use engineering metaphors to describe life.
Religion causes quarrels and pure reason alleviates them?
Beautiful animation of transcription and translation
Tom Wolfe at Socrates lecture where Steve Meyer spoke?
Debating Darwin and Design: Science or Creationism? (7) – Joshua Gidney’s Third Response
After another unfortunately lengthy break, we’re at it again. This post is my latest response to Francis Smallwood. Francis is first and foremost, a dear friend, but also a Christian neo-Darwinist. He writes at his blog Musings of Science. This response is part of a long-term (hopefully lifelong), dialogue on many different topics relating to the theory of intelligent design and neo-Darwinism. We are both very excited about continuing this project. Francis’ previous response can be found here: http://musingsofscience.wordpress.com/2012/02/26/debating-darwin-and-design-science-or-creationism-4/ Debating Darwin and Design A dialogue between two Christians 1. Is Intelligent Design science or ‘creationism in a cheap tuxedo’? 12th September 2013 Joshua Gidney – Third Response One of the many benefits of taking part in a written dialogue, Read More ›
Sunday Times calls Dawkins’ autobiography “fatally smug”
Genome mapping shows tunafish related to fish with completely different body shape, lifestyles
Tom Bethell: Darwinism is mirror image of creationism
Agnostic philosopher David Stove on the unfalsifiability of Darwinism
Origin of life: What has materialism done for you lately?
Cool animations from Stroma Studios, including how cyanide poisons cells
Darwin’s Dilemma Remains Unresolved: What Lee’s Paper Didn’t Discuss
There has been much hullabaloo lately regarding a new paper published by a team of researchers, led by Associate Professor Michael Lee of the University of Adelaide, claiming that the abrupt appearance of dozens of animal groups in the early Cambrian period is no great mystery: rates of both morphological and genetic evolution were five times faster than today, that’s all. According to the paper, these rates “are still consistent with evolution by natural selection…, potentially resolving ‘Darwin’s dilemma.’” Are they right? The authors of the paper, Michael Lee, Julien Soubrier and Gregory Edgecombe, attempted to measure the rate of evolution at two levels: the phenotypic level (which mostly relates to changes in an organism’s form and structure) and the Read More ›