Research into Neanderthal toolmaking suggests that most were right-handed
A black hole that just shouldn’t exist
Is human cloning possible? Neurosurgeon and philosopher spar
New Scientist: Our understanding of the cosmos is “seriously wrong”
Could “quasiparticles” reveal dark matter?
Researchers: Humans are much more sensitive to pitch than monkeys are
Yet another new type of intercellular communication discovered
Computer sim universe: An escape from the facts of fine-tuning?
Walter Bradley Center fellows weigh in: The idea that we are a simulation by space aliens is a staple of science fiction, of course (think The Matrix, 1999). But some scientists take this simulation hypothesis seriously. Serious discussion started with a paper by philosopher Nick Bostrom in 2003, “Are you living in a computer simulation?” in which he suggests, “One thing that later generations might do with their super-powerful computers is run detailed simulations of their forebears or of people like their forebears.”… Jonathan Bartlett offers, The simulation hypothesis is interesting but it fails precisely because it is too loosely stated, and equivocates more than it clarifies. The primary “proof” for the simulation hypothesis is that, let’s say that we Read More ›
Jeff Epstein’s cultural dumpster fire spreads to ID vs. evo controversies
Mike Behe’s book party for Darwin Devolves live-streamed from Seattle tonight
Controlling the waves of dynamic, far from equilibrium states: the NF-kB system of transcription regulation.
I have recently commented on another thread: about a paper that (very correctly) describes cells as dynamic, far from equilibrium systems, rather than as “traditional” machines. That is true. But, of course, the cell implements the same functions as complex machines do, and much more. My simple point is that, to do that, you need much greater functional complexity than you need to realize a conventional machine. IOWs, dynamic, far from equilibrium systems that can be as successful as a conventional machine, or more, must certainly be incredibly complex and amazing systems, systems that defy everything else that we already know and that we can conceive. They must not only implement their functional purposes, but they must do that by Read More ›
Are our political views coded in DNA? Jerry Coyne is not really convinced
As well he shouldn’t be. An op-ed in the Deep Statesville Intelligence claims, Given how natural selection works, it’s entirely possible that an aversion to evolutionary explanations is in itself a product of evolution. In a hostile environment, wouldn’t a belief in selfdetermination be adaptive? But no matter, the point is that anti-evolutionary bias makes rational discussion of the human race far more difficult … The fact that political opinion is rooted to some degree in our genes and biology means that both liberalism and conservatism may be adaptive traits that got passed down through thousands of human generations because they helped us survive. But another trait that is clearly adaptive is our ability to get along. Political arguments may Read More ›