Uncommon Descent Serving The Intelligent Design Community
Year

2019

Gunter Bechly on the media that teach nonsense about evolution

The media can’t really help teaching nonsense about evolution and they will definitely resist correction, putting it down to some dark creationist plot. That is because so much of it supports their worldview. Which may well reflect on their worldview. Read More ›

Time’s arrow, the design inference on FSCO/I and the one root of a complex world-order (–> Being, logic & first principles, 25)

On August 7th, News started a discussion on time’s arrow (which ties to the second law of thermodynamics). I found an interesting comment by FF: FF, 4: >> It’s always frustrating to read articles on time’s arrow or time travel. In one camp, we have the Star Trek physics fanatics who believe in time travel in any direction. In the other camp, we have those who believe only in travel toward the future. But both camps are wrong. It is logically impossible for time to change at all, in any direction. We are always in the present, a continually changing present. This is easy to prove. Changing time is self-referential. Changing time (time travel) would require a velocity in time Read More ›

Nice to see Gunter Bechly’s name on a paper again

It’s not even just heroes we want to see vindicated but ordinary joes and jills who can go about their business while saying, “I see plenty wrong with the dominant theory today.” Physicists are allowed that but biologists aren’t. That’s because Darwinism functions very much as a religion for Darwinians. Read More ›

Rob Sheldon on the chances of the tardigrades (water bears) surviving the recent moon crash

Sheldon: Well, I do think that dormant tardigrades, which could survive for hundreds if not thousands of years in a "freeze-dried" state, can be revived when placed in water. If the spacecraft, Beresheet, had crashed with dormant tardigrades, then most definitely they are scattered about the surface of the Moon, waiting for their resurrection day in water. Read More ›

Researchers puzzle over a dolphin who adopted a baby melon-headed whale

People anxious to cram all animal behavior into a Darwinian mold neglect the fact that temperaments among animals differ greatly. If we observe animal behavior long enough, we will surely see many departures from what is supposed to happen according to the theory. The animal does not actually know the theory; she does what occurs to her at the time and her temperament is bound to play a role. Read More ›

Physicists need courage to confront the Collider dilemma, says boson pioneer

Could the great age of particle physics be coming to an end? That is, not so much a crisis as the beginning of a long, slow decline? That happened to science in many former civilizations. There were high points and then somehow things slowed down. How would we know? Read More ›

Researchers: 50 million years needed to recover extinct NZ birds! No, alas,, it’s impossible

Apart from cloning, to get the exact same birds, we’d have to rent the multiverse (if it existed). And then we would have an infinite number of planets with islands like New Zealand, including these birds. Never mind one... Read More ›

What is National Center for Science Education (the Darwin in the schools lobby) doing now?

Well, an awful lot on climate change, for one thing. Wherever else the climate is changing, it is certainly changing around Darwinism. Perhaps this is a graceful exit for them. Read More ›

There is no Reason to Believe Any Computer Will Ever be Conscious

On this date in 1944 one of the first computers, the IBM Mark I, became operational.  See the Wiki article here.  From the article: [The Mark I] could do 3 additions or subtractions in a second.  A multiplication took 6 seconds, a division took 15.3 seconds, and a logarithm or a trigonometric function took over one minute. Now, here is the question for the class.  What is the difference, in principle, between the Mark I and the IBM Summit, which, as of late 2018, became the fastest supercomputer in the world, capable of performing calculations at the rate of 148.6 petaflops (one petaflop is one thousand million million floating-point operations per second)? The answer, of course, is “absolutely nothing.”  Both Read More ›

Listen to the “symphony of genes” in animal evolution…

So if all this complexity got started in something like the twinkling of an eye, are we looking at an argument for creationism? Or what? What exactly is the source of all this very complex, very early information? Read More ›