She notes: “The problem with Wilson’s perspective is that Darwin’s theory of natural selection has been discredited. Biology is no longer the descriptive science it once was.”
The top synthetic chemist is “being vilified by detractors as an attention-grabbing charlatan, an incompetent scientist, and even a ‘Liar for Jesus'” – John G. West
Perhaps this is why the raging Woke would prefer to smash things rather than study.
Omnipotent means the power to do any possible thing. Christians, for example, say that God “became man and suffered for us under Pontius Pilate.” So the answer to McGinn’s questions (“does he have the power to sneeze or digest food or pick his nose”) is yes, though it requires incarnation in a human body.
George Musser, a science writer reviewing a new book on the subject, thinks it will force free will skeptics to become more sophisticated in their arguments
Many biologists claimed to have written code to simulate evolution. But the popularization of the No Free Lunch theorems showed that the computer programmer must infuse guiding information into the evolutionary program to make it work. To explain the diversity of creativity, an evolution process must be directed.
Moonquakes happen, and they are shaking up lunar geology, Also, SkyNet reveals, “NASA announced earlier this year that it wants to send the first woman, and the next man, to the moon by 2024.” They can call in at the Chinese lunar base for tea… ;
My, my. A commenter formed the correct impression and suggests, “Could you please answer the very valid questions raised by Sabine [Hossenfelder] instead of smearing her like this?”
Every so often, for whatever reason, a US conservative thinkmag steps on Darwin’s rake.
Holloway: Intelligence, like randomness, is mathematically undefinable.
He recognizes that present AI displays the creativity of its creators and not that of a machine-based intelligence but why let that get in the way of a promising theory?.
Just because it’s not clear that the hypothetical particle she studies exists. Okay. But perhaps some physicists will still choose to research particles for whose existence there is actually evidence.
Gelernter is HOW likely to read Coyne’s diatribe and conclude he must be all wrong? But then Darwinians tend not to notice what others do. Presumably, it’s an adaptation.
Well, if genetics isn’t that important, what is heredity? Maybe epigenetics and horizontal gene transfer also shape the lives we live and live among. So then Darwinism is right but unimportant. It explains some things, not most things.
Well, they will just have to keep looking for that early, really simple bedbug, below which there is nothing but sub-bedbugs.