Uncommon Descent Serving The Intelligent Design Community
Author

News

Type
post
Author
Denyse O'Leary
Date
March 30, 2020
Categories
Artificial Intelligence
Intelligent Design
Mind
Naturalism
Tagged
, ,

Michael Egnor: Jeffrey Shallit, a computer scientist, doesn’t know how computers work

News
March 30, 2020
Artificial Intelligence, Intelligent Design, Mind, Naturalism
2
Egnor: It’s remarkable that Dr. Shallit—a professor of computer science—doesn’t understand computation. Materialism is a kind of intellectual disability that afflicts even the well-educated. To put it simply, machines don’t and can’t think. Dr. Shallit’s wristwatch doesn’t know what time it is. Read More ›
Type
post
Author
Denyse O'Leary
Date
March 30, 2020
Categories
Intelligent Design
Mathematics
Mind
Naturalism
Tagged
, , , ,

Eric Holloway: Math shows why the mind can’t be reduced to a formula

News
March 30, 2020
Intelligent Design, Mathematics, Mind, Naturalism
1
Holloway: The fundamental implication is that nothing within math, science, and technology can create information. Yet information is all around us. This problem arises in many areas: evolution, artificial intelligence, economics, and physics. Read More ›
Type
post
Author
Denyse O'Leary
Date
March 29, 2020
Categories
Culture
Darwinism
Intelligent Design

John West on Darwin’s corrosive idea

News
March 29, 2020
Culture, Darwinism, Intelligent Design
1
Intro: In the case of Darwin's idea of unguided evolution and of a planet of life formed from blind material processes alone, John West, Associate Director of the Center for Science & Culture, notes a range of consequences and impacts, on how we see the sanctity of human life, how we understand morality and spirituality, and much more. Read More ›
Type
post
Author
Denyse O'Leary
Date
March 29, 2020
Categories
Intelligent Design
theism
Tagged
, , ,

Michael Egnor: If you care about suffering, you implicitly acknowledge God’s existence

News
March 29, 2020
Intelligent Design, theism
2
Egnor: Heck, if I were a mere vehicle for selfish genes evolved wholly by natural selection, I would love mass death, as long as my own genes weren’t deleted. Coronavirus is efficient — natural selection on an industrial scale. Those of us who are alive are the winners. Read More ›
Type
post
Author
Denyse O'Leary
Date
March 29, 2020
Categories
Animal minds
Darwinism
Intelligent Design
Mind
Tagged
, ,

David Berlinski’s thought experiment: Darwinism vs. the obvious

News
March 29, 2020
Animal minds, Darwinism, Intelligent Design, Mind
3
A thought experiment by philosopher and mathematician David Berlinski echoes something Michael Egnor noted recently: Not only are human beings unique but we are unique despite being animals in nature. Here’s the thought experiment: Read More ›
Type
post
Author
Denyse O'Leary
Date
March 29, 2020
Categories
Cosmology
Fine tuning
Naturalism
Physics
Tagged
, ,

At New Scientist: There’s a basic fact about the universe that we “still don’t understand”

News
March 29, 2020
Cosmology, Fine tuning, Naturalism, Physics
2
Here’s a question: What if the basic fact we “still don't understand” is that the evidence shows that the universe is fine-tuned and that therefore, fine-tuning is not an illusion that needs explaining away? Would that simplify things? If so, how? Another question (now that we’re here anyway): How much publicly funded cosmology exists simply to promote a naturalist atheist (no fine-tuning) worldview? And what is the science rationale for that? Read More ›
Type
post
Author
Denyse O'Leary
Date
March 28, 2020
Categories
Design inference
Fine tuning
Intelligent Design
Naturalism
Tagged
,

Looking back at a 2017 paper that risks saying that ID is “not necessarily stupid”

News
March 28, 2020
Design inference, Fine tuning, Intelligent Design, Naturalism
4
One would feel vaguely sorry for Raymond Bergner if he found himself dealing with a horde of Darwin trolls. But it is so much easier to sympathize with people who are prepared to acknowledge facts more forthrightly and honestly. Read More ›
Type
post
Author
Denyse O'Leary
Date
March 28, 2020
Categories
Cosmology
Fine tuning
Intelligent Design
Physics
Tagged
, , ,

Rob Sheldon on why string theory’s inflationary cosmos is a degenerate research program

News
March 28, 2020
Cosmology, Fine tuning, Intelligent Design, Physics
7
Sheldon: The inflationary proposal has always been ad hoc. That is, a huge, faster-than-light expansion of the universe was proposed as a solution to the "flatness" problem, where the universe expands at a rate just sufficient to counter the gravitational attraction, where "just sufficient" means one part in 10^60 power. The inflationary model was invented to solve this fine-tuning problem. Read More ›
Type
post
Author
Denyse O'Leary
Date
March 27, 2020
Categories
horizontal gene transfer
Intelligent Design
Plants
stasis
Tagged
, ,

Billion-year-old algae (“leaves, … branches …”) raise some interesting questions

News
March 27, 2020
horizontal gene transfer, Intelligent Design, Plants, stasis
3
Like any real history, evolution is not driven by a single force or idea. Horizontal gene transfer from bacteria obviates the quest for an “ancestor” seaweed. Maybe there isn’t one. Read More ›
Type
post
Author
Denyse O'Leary
Date
March 27, 2020
Categories
Cosmology
Intelligent Design
Physics
Tagged
, , ,

Has a way been found to test string theory? Rob Sheldon responds

News
March 27, 2020
Cosmology, Intelligent Design, Physics
2
Sheldon: “This article explains precisely why thousands of theoretical physicists have not made any progress in 40 years. One hopelessly ad hoc and unsupported theory (inflation) conflicts with another hopelessly unphysical theory (string theory) and then others purport to resolve the difficulty by resorting to highly questionable phenomena (gravity waves). Read More ›
Type
post
Author
Denyse O'Leary
Date
March 26, 2020
Categories
Genetics
Intelligent Design
Video
Tagged
,

Researchers made films to help explain the spliceosome

News
March 26, 2020
Genetics, Intelligent Design, Video
1
A friend tells us that Michael Lynch of the Biodesign Institute of Arizona State) has argued that the spliceosome is so complex, because it just couldn’t help being that way. Here’s a question: How did such an explanation get to be called “science”? Read More ›