Uncommon Descent Serving The Intelligent Design Community

Now Nature endorses Joe Biden for US Prez—and doesn’t seem to realize what it is doing to itself

Nature was founded in 1869. Between then and now, many U.S. Prezzes have come and gone. The puzzling part is why Nature (and stablemate Scientific American) would throw themselves into the fray like this, as if they had no reputation or credibility, apart from politics, to defend. If it’s all really about politics, fine. Many suspected that but no one could prove it. Now, any statement made on behalf of “science” will be wisely read as on behalf of “politics.” That will harm genuinely urgent causes the most. When there’s no daylight between “Stop plastic in the oceans!” and “Vote for Schmeezer!”, most people will make up their own mind about plastic in the oceans/Schmeezer. The authority of science becomes indistinguishable from Schmeezer's media outreach. Well, at least they brought it on themselves. Read More ›

Putting Richard Dawkins’s evolution claims to a computer science test

Eric Holloway: When we apply Dawkins’s “blind evolution” explanation of the abilities exhibited by insects to the real world engineering, all we get is fancy knob twiddlers. Read More ›

Physicist Rob Sheldon checks out astrophysicist Ethan Siegel for ridiculing Nobelist Roger Penrose

Sheldon: The politicization of science evidently started before Ethan's graduate schooling, as Hoyle and his post-doc Chandra Wickramasinghe tell in their biographical writings. Read More ›

Now the Journal of Theoretical Biology is publishing a rebuttal letter to the design-friendly paper

Which is fine in principle. But be realistic. The Darwin mob, an early flowering of Cancel Culture, will not be satisfied with anything less than retraction and the obliteration of the careers of everyone involved. If that is accomplished by scandalously spurious means, all the better for the mob. That increases its sense of power and self-justification. Saying NO! To them is an act of liberation. Read More ›

(Reformed) New Scientist 12: Evolution favors some outcomes, not others

So “Each lake contains many different species that show striking similarities in the variety of body shapes to species in the other lake, despite being more closely related to those living in their own lake” but “These body shapes adapt species to particular niches or diets, so must have evolved by natural selection.” But wait! The traditional argument for natural selection acting on random mutations (Darwinism) was that the species WOULD BE similar to more closely related species. If they’re not, … Read More ›

Sabine Hossenfelder Promotes Determinism

Yesterday theoretical physicist Sabine Hossenfelder became the latest in a long line of smart people to make the absurd claim of determinism, and that therefore there is no such thing as free will. This silliness traces at least as far back as Laplace and is based on the idea that any system evolves from time point 1 to time point 2 according to the laws of nature. As Hossenfelder puts it: (read more …)

Judge Amy Coney Barrett begins US Supreme Court nomination hearings

Judge Barrett has issued the text of her remarks ahead of the hearings. She is President Trump’s third nominee and the hearings are liable to be contentious, one hopes the sort of accusations raised against Mr Kavanaugh will not occur. It is to be noted that election year nominations to the Supreme Court have happened a significant number of times since the 1790’s. Over the past century and more, several times, nominees proposed by a president of one party with a Senate dominated by the other have failed, while same-party nominations have typically gone through. The US Constitution simply stipulates Presidential nomination and Senate “advice and consent.” In past decades, such were not contentious, but the Court has deteriorated into Read More ›

Ten reasons why your brain is not the same as your mind

6. If the mind were real, wouldn’t we be able to control things by thoughts alone? We do that now with our bodies. And we can do it under other circumstances too if an electrical connection can be established. Neurons can work with electrical signals from electronics. Read More ›

Here’s the Twitter discussion of that ID-friendly paper at the Journal of Theoretical Biology

The Darwinist commenters below the tweet would put one in mind of coyotes except that coyotes must, perforce, have pack standards. They can’t just howl ANYTHING they please... Well, we shall see what happens next. Read More ›