It’s 2016, and some sciences face serious questions
Recently, a sociologist who has studied ID for some years, without being an advocate, went on record saying that he thought it will become part of mainstream science inquiry We hope that isn’t the ruin of it. Critical thinking about first principles is much easier when one is not part of a grand official huff-ology. That is also the reason, as Malcolm Muggeridge pointed out, why proportionately far more great literature has been written in prisons than on government grants. But enough about us. As noted earlier, the Royal Society seems serious (for now) about seeing past Darwin. I mean, how much more of this kind of stuff do they really want? (Were the mares also playing the stock market?) Read More ›