Election season is upon us and we hope for clarity in the debates to come. Too often campaign strategies involve ambiguity, avoiding difficult questions and political calculation. But sometimes the candidates’ positions on the issues, and their point of disagreement, are clear for all to see. I would rather have such clarity, even if I disagree on some of the issues. As with politics, the origins debate also sometimes lacks clarity. I don’t have a problem with disagreement, but I hope people understand what they are disagreeing on. A good example is the problem of evil. It is often at the heart of disagreements in the origins debate, and because it deals with ultimate issues it offers a clear distinction Read More ›

My last post elicited some extremely interesting responses. As a reminder, we are considering the following two strings of text, the first of which resulted from haphazard banging on a keyboard and the second of which is the first 12 lines of Hamlet’s soliloquy: #1: OipaFJPSDIOVJN;XDLVMK:DOIFHw;ZD VZX;Vxsd;ijdgiojadoidfaf;asdfj;asdj[ije888 Sdf;dj;Zsjvo;ai;divn;vkn;dfasdo;gfijSd;fiojsa dfviojasdgviojao’gijSd’gvijsdsd;ja;dfksdasd XKLZVsda2398R3495687OipaFJPSDIOVJN ;XDLVMK:DOIFHw;ZDVZX;Vxsd;ijdgiojadoi Sdf;dj;Zsjvo;ai;divn;vkn;dfasdo;gfijSd;fiojsadfvi ojasdgviojao’gijSd’gvijssdv.kasd994834234908u XKLZVsda2398R34956873ACKLVJD;asdkjad Sd;fjwepuJWEPFIhfasd;asdjf;asdfj;adfjasd;ifj ;asdjaiojaijeriJADOAJSD;FLVJASD;FJASDF; DOAD;ADFJAdkdkas;489468503-202395ui34 #2: To be, or not to be, that is the question— Whether ’tis Nobler in the mind to suffer The Slings and Arrows of outrageous Fortune, Or to take Arms against a Sea of troubles, And by opposing, end them? To die, to sleep— No more; and by a sleep, to say we end The Heart-ache, and the thousand Natural shocks That Flesh Read More ›

Jerry Coyne has written a post in which he states that he is inclined to believe that Jesus never existed, although he hasn’t made up his mind yet. And on what does Coyne base his tentative opinion? An article in the Huffington Post by a biopsychologist named Nigel Barber, a self-published book by a systems engineer, Michael Paulkovich, which Coyne admits he hasn’t read, and finally, another book which he hasn’t read, written by atheist activist Richard Carrier, who has a Ph.D. in ancient history, but who (judging from his Wikipedia biography) has no teaching or research position at any accredited institution. [Update: according to his C.V., Carrier teaches classes at the Center for Inquiry Institute Online (a think tank Read More ›

PZ Myers has written a post in which he reprimands Dr. Neil deGrasse Tyson for failing to acknowledge that he falsely quoted former President George Bush in some talks he gave. I wonder if Professor Myers will publicly apologize for attributing a false quote to equity feminist Christina Hoff Sommers in a recent post he wrote on September 16, 2014, in which he accused Dr. Sommers (pictured above), who is currently employed by the American Enterprise Institute, of being “a professional selective quote-miner and anecdote-citer who is on a mission from AEI to discredit all of feminism” and “a contrarian beloved by anti-feminists … with a reputation for dishonesty and twisting the facts.” For good measure, he added that “she’s Read More ›

Mark Frank writes in a comment to a prior post: When reconstructing an evolutionary past I would say that scientists are doing two things which correspond to my Bayesian analysis: They are proposing explanations that 1) might well have happened – the prior probability is acceptable 2) would have a good chance of producing what we observe – the likelihood is acceptable When reconstructing a biological past I would say that ID scientists are doing two things which correspond to Mark Frank’s Bayesian analysis: They are proposing explanations that 1) might well have happened – the prior probability is acceptable 2) would have a good chance of producing what we observe – the likelihood is acceptable Mark Frank, do you Read More ›