Not so. With all due respect, EL’s error here is a case of failure to think through the inductive logic of abductive inference to best explanation on a tested, reliable sign. (And indeed the statistics of Type I/II error extend that to cases of known percentage reliability, especially when multiple aspects or signs are involved that each have reasonable reliability: the odds of several reasonably independent tests, n, all being wrong in the same way [1 – p] fall away rather quickly. For simplicity, say odds of being right, p, are the same; the probability of n tests all being wrong the same way would be like (1 – p)^n. This is BTW the basis for correcting Hume’s error on Read More ›

From ScienceDaily: Paleontologists have documented how dramatic shifts in climate have led to dramatic shifts in evolution. One such event, the Grande Coupure, was a wipeout of many European mammal species 33.9 million years ago when global temperatures and precipitation declined sharply. What has been puzzling is that during the same transition between the Eocene and Oligocene periods, North American mammals fared much better. A new study explains why: the rise of the Rocky Mountains, already underway for millions of years, had predisposed populations to adapt to a cold, dry world. … In Europe, meanwhile, tectonic developments weren’t a major factor driving local climate. When the global climate change happened, that continent’s mammals were evolutionary sitting ducks. Other studies have Read More ›

Explained at Real Clear Science: As a genus, humans, from Homo sapiens (that’s us) to our extinct ancestors Homo neanderthalensis and Homo erectus, are wanderers. Over the vast majority of our history, which spans hundreds of thousands of years, we have roved from place to place, inhabiting a wide range of habitats. We moved with the seasons, we moved to find food, we moved — perhaps — just to move. Our adaptability was our key adaptation, an evolutionary leg-up on the competition. The ability to store fat was vital to this lifestyle. Body fat cushions internal organs, but it also serves as a repository of energy that can be readily broken down and used to power muscles. Humans might fatten Read More ›

Guess who wrote this frite? Right. Zack Kopplin. The Louisiana Science Education Act, passed by the state legislature in 2008, permits science teachers to use supplemental materials to “critique” evolution, opening a backdoor that these teachers are using, as intended, to teach creationism. Such lessons are allowed under this Louisiana law, but they are illegal under federal law. All it will take is for one Louisiana parent or student to sue the state for endorsing religion in public school. And they didn’t because … On April 22 the Louisiana Senate Education Committee voted on a bill to repeal the Science Education Act, referred to by many on both sides as the “creationism act.” This was the fifth vote since 2010, Read More ›

Here. The first feeding study of tropical Australia’s Irukandji box jellyfish has found that they actively fish. They attract larval fish by twitching their extended tentacles, highlighting their nematocyst clusters (stinging structures) and using them as lures. It’s an impressive feat by any standards, but particularly so for an animal that doesn’t have a defined brain. “They’re not opportunistically grazing — they’re deliberately fishing. They’re targeting and catching fish that are at times as big as they are, and are far more complex animals. This is a really neat animal that is displaying a surprisingly complex prey capture strategy.” The researchers were able to catch Carukia barnesi in the act by filming them through a full day and night cycle, Read More ›

Here, in a review of Does Altruism Exist? Culture, Genes, and the Welfare of Others (David Sloan Wilson/Yale University/Templeton Press): Wilson believes that to answer this question, we must turn to evolutionary theory, and especially to a theory known as group selection, which holds that better adapted groups produce more offspring, with the result that their traits are passed on. The implications are far-reaching. If group selection is correct, it follows that humans and other group-living creatures are fundamentally not selfish but cooperative and even altruistic—that we human beings owe our existence to distant ancestors who were members of groups that succeeded because they were better able to cooperate than other groups. Group selection departs from the more familiar model Read More ›

Take him home, will you? Meanwhile, check out the other weird frogs shown. Follow UD News at Twitter!

One of the key diversions made by objectors to a design inference on empirically tested, reliable markers of design as causal factor, is to try to switch topics and debate about the designer. Often, this then bleeds over into assertions or suggestions on “god of the gaps” fallacies and even accusations of ID being “Creationism in a cheap tuxedo” artificially constructed to try to evade a US Supreme Court ruling of 1987 on banning the teaching of Creationism in schools. Okay, first, the series so far: Let’s discuss: >> Elizabeth Liddle: I do not think the ID case holds up. I think it is undermined by [want of . . . ???] any evidence for the putative designer . . Read More ›

But many Christians in science do not seemingly want to confront that fact. Can they not face the ensuing responsibilities? Further to “How BioLogos describes the intelligent design community, commenter Ted Davis, a Biologian, replies (he follows up with a challenge for yer news hack, as per below): I’ll follow it with a second question for you, Denyse: Why do you continue to whip on the ASA? Is your complaint simply that the ASA is not an advocacy organization, such as UD or TDI or AiG or BL? If your complaint is that there are too many proponents of evolution in the ASA, then persuade a few hundred ID supporters to join the ASA and you’ll change the facts. … Read More ›

Further to “How BioLogos describes the intelligent design community, commenter Ted Davis, a Biologian, replies: I know everyone at BL and hundreds of ASA members, and I can never recall any one of them endorsing metaphysical naturalism. Not one. In every single case, if Denyse were to ask someone ” whether scientific explanations require metaphysical naturalism,” the answer would be, No. So, Denyse, having pretended to ask a question on your behalf, I’ll now ask you one on my behalf: Who’s ducking that question? Oh dear. This is one of those awkward situations. Of course no claimed Christian ever directly admits to metaphysical naturalism. Why would they? They would have to quit their jobs and their churches. That does not Read More ›

Because it is not about the science. Which is largely non-existent. Popular culture needs the multiverse, and string theory is the gateway drug. Here I’m busy with other things, so no possible way I can keep up with the claims about string theory flooding the media for some reason these days. It’s hard enough to find the time to read all of this, much less write something thoughtful about it… One obvious point to make though is that none of it acknowledges the obvious: the widely promoted idea that we can get a unified theory and explain the Standard Model by using a theory of strings has turned out to be an empty one. See also:Why modern cosmology not only Read More ›

I commend to our readers Casey Luskin’s excellent If Evolution Has Implications for Religion, Can We Justify Teaching It in Public Schools? Mr. Luskin answers his question as follows: one can legally justify teaching evolution while being sensitive to the fact that it has larger implications that touch upon the religious beliefs of many Americans. This reasoning offers the best of both worlds. It allows science to be taught in the science classroom while respecting the beliefs of people who have religious objections to evolution. Many evolutionists, however, would probably dislike this way of thinking. Why? Because the very same approach would justify teaching about intelligent design in public schools. Casey is obviously correct as a matter of simple logic Read More ›

One of the persistent dismissive assertions we see from objectors to design thought is the notion that there is “no evidence” for a designer. As we have already seen, that is questionable, immediately a reflection of selective hyperskepticism, but I believe something deeper lurks. For, the very intensity of this dismissive talking point is a clue: on evolutionary materialism, it is problematic for genuine design — based on freedom to reason, creative insight and genuine purposefulness — to exist. So, it is no wonder that those in the iron grip of this ideology will have problems acknowledging evidence of design, however strong. For, if matter, energy, space, time and blind chance and/or mechanically necessary combinations of such are all that Read More ›

BioLogos, we are informed, is holding a meet right near an American Scientific Affiliation conference. Funded by Templeton millions, it claims: In contrast to EC, YEC, and OEC, Intelligent Design(ID) does not explicitly align itself with Christianity. It claims that the existence of an intelligent cause of the universe and of the development of life is a testable scientific hypothesis. ID arguments often point to parts of scientific theories where there is no consensus and claim that the best solution is to appeal to the direct action of an intelligent designer. At BioLogos, we believe that our intelligent God designed the universe, but we do not see scientific or biblical reasons to give up on pursuing natural explanations for how Read More ›

From New Scientist, reviewing two books: Plants, say the authors, are highly responsive, attuned to gravity, grains of sand, sunlight, starlight, the footfalls of tiny insects and to slow rhythms outside our range. They are subtle, aware, strategic beings whose lives involve an environmental sensitivity very distant from the simple flower and seed factories of popular imagination. More. Here’s a possibility: Our notion of intelligence was actually standardized on human intelligence. Which is of an entirely different type. Intelligence is everywhere in nature, and manifests itself in different ways. Follow UD News at Twitter!