2014
Making New Genes Just Got More Exotic—Yes They Evolve, But How?
Making new genes is not easy. For several decades now it has been thought that the only process for gene construction is to start by duplicating an existing gene and then making adjustments to it (it is not the only process, but that is another story). Naturally evolutionists interpreted this duplication process as another example of an evolutionary mechanism. What they don’t consider, however, is how subtle this process is. Read more
Is the non-dominant hand vital to the evolution of the thumb?
The “Me No Speaka The English Distraction”
In my Not Merely False post I made the following statement. It is not possible even in principle to account for mental facts . . . on the basis of physical facts. For anyone who has read Thomas Nagel’s Mind and Cosmos, this phraseology should be familiar, because the idea for the post came from that book. Yes, I am basing an assertion on the writings of a materialist author (albeit one who is uncommonly honest about the shortcomings of materialism). In response Graham2 wrote: If you people insist on such vague, slippery terms such as a ‘mental fact’ then these discussions are pretty pointless. What on earth is a ‘mental fact’ ? By “you people” I suppose Graham2 is Read More ›
Neuroscientist Sam Harris says he is NOT a sexist pig, and clearly isn’t
ARN Vid: Stephen Meyer and Marcus Ross on Irreducible Complexity
Robert Marks on probability and random processes
Here’s Something Orwell Didn’t Predict
According to a report from The Times earlier this year, policy makers in Britain are attempting to enforce AGW Read more
Global Warming and Information Manipulation
Here is a paper out of the PRCthat raises some awkward questions about the intellectual climate surrounding global warming. Apparently with all the blackballing, peer-review control, publication manipulation, and funding and career threats, the Chinese suspect there might be some manipulation of information at work. Read more
Language study PR namedrops Darwin; sure to get taken seriously now
Could the notochord have originated as muscle?
Genetic program for a face long predates a recognizable face
Textbook theory about volcanos is wrong, apparently
Reply To An Argument Against Objective Morality: When Words Lose All Meaning
I had originally intended to post this in the comment thread to my first article here as a guest author, titled, Does It Matter What We Believe About Morality? In the end, however, it turned out to be sufficiently long and detailed that it seemed to warrant a new original post. If it’s preferred that this type of thing simply stay in the comments section then please let me know for future reference. In comment #39 for that article, Popperian made some thoughtful contributions. This is a reply to that comment, with most of his original text reproduced for reference. —————————————- Popperian, you said: Think of it this way… Before one could actually apply any set of objective moral principles, wouldn’t this necessitate a way Read More ›
Evolutionist Says Evolution’s “Traditional Framework” Must Go
Why is it that the same structures in similar species are constructed, during embryonic development, in different ways? Why is it that the master control genes which direct the embryonic development of complex structures, such as the eye, must have arisen long before those complex structures arose, if evolution is true? One might have thought that the much celebrated field of evodevo (the study of the evolution of embryonic development) might have resolved such thorny questions. Instead it seems to have simply raised more questions about evolutionary theory. In fact one recent review reads like something out of the Intelligent Design movement: Read more