NeoDarwinism expected a fine gradation of form from one species to the next but the distribution of morphologies is clumpy at virtually all scales. Appeals to gaps in the fossil record don’t solve the problem and now evolutionists are considering more complex explanations for how evolution could have produced such morphological discontinuities. They are also suggesting that the expectation of fine gradations between species may have been driven by Charles Lyell’s promotion of uniformitarianism in geology and by the desire to be physics-like. Darwin’s friend Thomas Huxley warned Darwin about his narrow focus on gradualism. As Douglas Erwinexplains:  Read more

If I hadn’t read it myself, I would never have believed that a professor of biology could have written this: “A liver cell cannot survive on its own except in the body (or a Petri dish), and a fetus cannot survive on its own until well into pregnancy. So if other cells are parasitic on the organism, and have DNA, and that DNA could potentially produce an entire person, why aren’t all of our cells ‘persons’? Is it not murder to pluck out a hair?” Jerry Coyne is a Professor in the Department of Ecology and Evolution at the University of Chicago. On December 27, he wrote a post entitled, Vatican scientist claims that “reason was created by God”; gets Read More ›

There is much disagreement over evolution but it is not controversial that evolution is the most influential theory in the history of modern science. This is particularly true in areas outside of science. Evolutionary thought has permeated, for example, education, media, law, public policy, and environmentalism. And just as evolutionary theory is deeply flawed its various influences have had disastrous results. A prominent example from the twentieth century was evolution’s role in the formation of racial thought in Nazi Germany, as historian Richard Weikart documents in a recentpaper. Here is how Weikart summarizes the ways that Nazi racial thought was shaped by Darwinism:  Read more

What’s the difference between creationism and ID? Noah’s flood, the genealogies, tower of Babel, Sodom and Gomorrah — in sum, creationism is defined by the book of Genesis, whereas ID is not focused on these matters at all. ID is the search for patterns that signify the action of intelligence. Judeo-Christian Creationism is the study of the book of Genesis. ID is very important to creationism, but not vice versa. For those of us in the creationist community, some of us chuckle that Darwinists call all ID proponents creationists. If you really want to know what’s important to creationists, consider the Creation Research Society’s statement of belief: All members must subscribe to the following statement of belief: 1. The Bible Read More ›

New UD commenter ayearningforpublius has put up a comment on the implications of facial recognition, several times. I think it significant enough as a case of FSCO/I and the challenge of addressing its origin, to headline it. But first, let’s put up the vid clip he links: [youtube HroAq_E075Y] Now, his remarks: _________________ >> The following scenario is familiar to most of us, particularly as we grow older: We walk into a crowded and noisy room full of mostly strangers and unfamiliar heads bobbing up and down. Then off to the side and slightly behind we hear and recognize a familiar voice … we turn our head searching for that old friend we know is there, and after a short Read More ›

Many animals use a built-in sixth sense called magnetoreception to sense direction and even location as they travel long distances. These magnetoreception capabilities are highly sophisticated and, after many decades of research, scientists still have not unraveled the full story. But as a recent report explains, a barrage of ingenuous experiments have begun to piece together many important aspects of magnetoreception.  Read more

A lot of premier discussions at UD recently do not bring up google hits, but other sites which reference discussions at UD come up on google. This seems odd and deliberate. I cannot say for sure but this seems suspicious. A comment by fryether (still trapped in the moderation queue, which I have no authority to release) said: As an IT Professional, I am shocked that if you look up “uncommon descent” on google the only reference to the actual site is behe.uncommondescent.com along with a plethora of anti-ID sites. Compare the results to the BING and you see a huge difference. No I make no money off of bing. I don’t even use it myself. Although I might start Read More ›