Uncommon Descent Serving The Intelligent Design Community
Author

News

Our enterprising ancestors’ version of canned soup, 400 kya

"We show for the first time in our study that 420,000 to 200,000 years ago, prehistoric humans at Qesem Cave were sophisticated enough, intelligent enough and talented enough to know that it was possible to preserve particular bones of animals under specific conditions, and, when necessary, remove the skin, crack the bone and eat the bone marrow," Prof. Gopher explains Read More ›

Bacteria thrive via non-Darwinian “survival of the friendliest”

"In the classic Darwinian mindset, competition is the name of the game. The best suited survive and outcompete those less well suited. However, when it comes to microorganisms like bacteria, our findings reveal the most cooperative ones survive," explains Department of Biology microbiologist, Professor Søren Johannes Sørensen. Read More ›

Nathaniel Comfort, fresh off an op-ed in Nature, skewers pop Darwinian Steven Pinker

It’s getting so that Darwinians are being treated like ordinary folk who could actually be wrong about some things. What is the world coming to? Where is Queen Umpadeedle when they need her? Read More ›

Real science vs pseudoscience—according to pop science

Davis goes on to identify exploded science theories, for example, spontaneous generation of life. But stop, wait! The very doctrine of the natural origin of life from inanimate materials teaches precisely this. Is Davis saying that the one true doctrine of naturalism on the subject is wrong? Read More ›

Nathan Lents plugs Joshua Swamidass’s book on Adam and Eve at USA Today

Actually, it would make way more sense to take Adam and Eve seriously than to take the multiverse seriously, as many atheists do. Everyone is familiar with the type of human behavior Adam and Eve are said to have engaged in. No one knows what a universe that literally makes no sense would be like. Read More ›

Talking to a computer? Marks and Montañez offer tips on how to tell

Robert J. Marks: It’s always easy to determine if you are talking to a computer or a human. You can just ask them to compute the square root of 30 or something because a human would take a while to get the square root of thirty … Read More ›

At Scientific American: We did find life on Mars in the ‘70s. Rob Sheldon weighs in

Levin: When the Viking Molecular Analysis Experiment failed to detect organic matter, the essence of life, however, NASA concluded that the LR had found a substance mimicking life, but not life. Inexplicably, over the 43 years since Viking, none of NASA’s subsequent Mars landers has carried a life detection instrument to follow up on these exciting results. Read More ›

Do Jeffrey Shallit’s writings offer more information than a blank page?

Michael Egnor wonders whether that’s true. But he faces the difficulty of convincing anti-ID mathematician Jeffrey Shallit, that HE, at least, ought to think they do. Read More ›