Uncommon Descent Serving The Intelligent Design Community
Author

News

Researchers: How butterflies develop the same wing color via different paths “forever changes the way evolution is understood.”

Riccardo Papa, co-author and professor at the University of Puerto Rico: “Distinct species with identical wing-color patterns, such as co-mimetic butterflies, can evolve using different molecular strategies. Imagine the same notes played on different instruments!" We CAN imagine it. It is called intelligent design. The melody is an idea and it can be iterated on different instruments. Thanks for listening. Read More ›

Researchers: Evolution is not “survival of the fittest”

"However, less-fit lineages also routinely leapfrog over strains of higher fitness. Our results demonstrate that this combination of factors, which is not accounted for in existing models of evolutionary dynamics, is critical in determining the rate, predictability and molecular basis of adaptation.” If Darwinism mattered the way it used to, this would be heresy. Read More ›

New Scientist: Dark matter’s no-show casts doubt on Big Bang; Rob Sheldon replies

Sheldon: The recent publication of the Italians+Silk paper has now voiced the unspeakable: there is something wrong with the Lambda-CDM Big Bang model, and by inference, the 2011 Nobel Prize. Neither "dark matter" nor "dark energy" seem to exist in a form that makes the model work. Read More ›

Peter Boghossian: Culture War II unites Christians and atheists

Boghossian: In Culture War 2.0, correspondence theories of truth aren’t just dead: truth itself is inaccessible to people who do not possess the right identity characteristics. Read More ›

Natural biomolecule measured while acting like a quantum wave

From the Abstract: The successful realization of quantum optics with this polypeptide as a prototypical biomolecule paves the way for quantum-assisted molecule metrology and in particular the optical spectroscopy of a large class of biologically relevant molecules. Read More ›

New books on consciousness underscore naturalism’s fatal problem

Well, if the mind is an illusion and the computer simulations were wildly wrong, how would Hoffman even know? But does it matter, as long as he keeps the Darwinian faith? No wonder the scoffing grows—and increasingly, the thought police are always somewhere else. Read More ›

Evidence for insect pollination pushed back to 99 mya

That’s twice as long ago as previously thought. It is interesting how much theorizing depends on Darwinism rather than on sudden emergence and then stasis. And then suddenly there is no 50 million years to account for... A quite different set of problems appears. Read More ›

Sabine Hossenfelder asks, How can we test a theory of everything?

Hossenfelder: But there is no reason to think that the forces of the standard model have to be unified, or that all the forces ultimately derive from one common explanation. It would be nice, but maybe that’s just not how the universe works. Read More ›

Maybe Nick Matzke should talk to Denis Noble

Denis Noble: “If, as the commentator seems to imply, we make neo-Darwinism so flexible as an idea that it can accept even those findings that the originators intended to be excluded by the theory it is then incumbent on modern neo-Darwinists to specify what would now falsify the theory. If nothing can do this then it is not a scientific theory.” Read More ›