Uncommon Descent Serving The Intelligent Design Community
Month

January 2014

A quick question for Dr. Liddle and other skeptics

Over at The Skeptical Zone, Dr. Elizabeth Liddle has written a thought-provoking post, which poses an interesting ethical conundrum about the morality of creating sentient beings. Dr. Liddle’s post was titled, Getting some stuff off my chest…., and its tone was remarkably conciliatory, as the following extracts reveal: I don’t think that science has disproven, nor even suggests, that it is unlikely that an Intelligent Designer was responsible for the world, and intended it to come into existence. I don’t think that science has, nor even can, prove that divine and/or miraculous intervention is impossible. I think the world has properties that make it perfectly possible for an Intelligent Deity to “reach in” and tweak things to her liking – Read More ›

On consciousness, Tegmark gets one thing right, says Rob Sheldon

So what did Tegmark just say when he said “Consciousness is a state of matter”? He just said, “Consciousness is something people are consciously conscious of.” As Dufflepuds would say, “So true, so true, Boss.” But this is not what Penrose was saying about his microtubules. Read More ›

It’s Sunday morning so I get to talk about the praying mantis, right?

Ah yes, the deniable Darwin. It’s been eighteen years since I was having lunch with one of the smartest people I knew, in Toronto. He made me come back to his office to wait while he photocopied “The Deniable Darwin” for me to read. And get back to him and tell him what I thought. Read More ›

Fantastic Experiment Shows Bird Formations Contradict Evolution

When aircraft fly the air pressure on the underside of the wing is greater than on the topside. This pressure difference provides the needed lift force on the wings. It also causes the air at the end of the wing to move upward and then around in a circle, resulting in a strong vortex that trails the wing tips as the aircraft flies (see photo). Birds also have trailing vortices but they are far more complex given the complicated shape of the wing and the bird’s flapping motion. And so while it is tempting to think that the familiar V-formation used by migrating birds is for aerodynamic efficiency, evolutionists have long since been skeptical because of the tremendous precision that Read More ›

Why the best arguments for the existence of God are not stupid

The New Republic has just published Professor Jerry Coyne’s critical review of David Bentley Hart’s latest work, The Experience of God: Being, Consciousness, Bliss, despite the fact that Coyne openly admits to not having read Hart’s book, although he says he intends to. For a literary magazine like The New Republic, I have to say that this marks a new low. Let me declare up-front that I haven’t read Hart’s book, either. I am, however, familiar with much of Hart’s thinking, because I’ve made the effort to understand him on his own terms. Jerry Coyne’s review, titled, The ‘Best Arguments for God’s Existence’ Are Actually Terrible, rests on a complete misunderstanding of what Hart is saying in his book, and Read More ›

Evolutionist: Science Doesn’t Lie

In her wacky video promoting evolution Carin Bondar states that science doesn’t lie. This sentiment is common amongst evolutionists and the problem is that evolution isn’t science, and if it was, then science would be guilty of lying. Over the top criticism? No, these simply are the facts.  Read more

Zombies, duplicates, human beasts and consciousness

Everyone seems to be writing about zombies lately: Edward Feser (Zombies: A Shopper’s Guide, December 19, 2013), David Gelerntner (The Closing of the Scientific Mind, Commentary, 1/1/2014), Barry Arrington (see here and here), Elizabeth Liddle (see here and here) and Denyse O’Leary. In today’s post, I’m going to throw my hat into the ring. A few preliminary definitions What is a zombie, anyway? First of all, what is a zombie? I’m not talking about the animated corpse that some Haitians believe in, or the creature from the movies. What I’m talking about is what’s known as a philosophical zombie. Professor Edward Feser concisely defines the term as follows: A “zombie,” in the philosophical sense of the term, is a creature Read More ›