Uncommon Descent Serving The Intelligent Design Community
Author

scordova

More reasons paleoanthropology has a bad reputation and ID continues its advance

Not long ago an anthropologist resigned in ‘dating disaster’. Now we learn world famous paleoantrhopologist Leakey Manipulated His Apelike “Skull 1470” to Look Human . Dr. Leakey produced a reconstruction that could not have existed in real life…. let’s see if Leakey will recant. Let’s see if the textbook publishers will fix the mistake. His Skull 1470 raised quite a stir at the time and gained Leakey international fame. Now, it comes out that Leakey’s personal bias dictated how he put the puzzle pieces of bone together. How much does this go on in the dubious practice of paleoanthropology? What other instances are out there right now with built-in bias? Here it is 25 years after the discovery before the Read More ›

“Eugenics was Darwin’s only gift to medicine”

Respected doctor and professor of neurosurgery Michael Egnor reports in Darwin, Mendel, Watson and Crick, and Al Gore: Darwin’s theory impeded the recognition of Mendel’s discovery for a third of a century, and Darwin’s assertion that random variation was the raw material for biological complexity was of no help in decoding the genetic language of DNA. The single incontrovertible Darwinian contribution to the field of medical genetics was eugenics, which is the Darwinian theory that humans can be bred for social and character traits, like animals. The field of medical genetics is still recovering from eugenics, which was Darwin’s only gift to medicine. More

Why would I want my doctor to have studied evolution?

From Dr. Michael Egnor: No Nobel prize in medicine has ever been awarded for work in evolutionary biology. In fact, I think it’s safe to say that the only contribution evolution has made to modern medicine is to take it down the horrific road of eugenics, which brought forced sterilization and bodily harm to many thousands of Americans in the early 1900s. That’s a contribution which has brought shame — not advance — to the medical field. So ‘Why would I want my doctor to have studied evolution?’ I wouldn’t. Evolutionary biology isn’t important to modern medicine. That answer won’t win the ‘Alliance for Science’ prize. It’s just the truth. MORE

Comparing Darwin to a real math and physics genius

Darwin wrote of himself:

I attempted mathematics [at Cambridge University ], and even went during the summer of 1828 with a private tutor (a very dull man) to Barmouth, but I got on very slowly. The work was repugnant to me, chiefly from my not being able to see any meaning in the early steps of algebra. This impatience was foolish, and in after years I have deeply regretted that I did not proceed far enough at least to understand something of the great leading principles of mathematics; for men thus endowed seem to have an extra sense. But I do not believe that I should ever have succeeded beyond a very low grade.

Autobiography (p. 58 of the 1958 Norton edition)

Read More ›

ID Proponent Jonathan Wells on Starbucks Coffee Cups

Both Skeptic Forum and Krauze at TelicThoughts are reporting that quotations of Jonathan Wells are appearing on Starbucks coffee cups. “Darwinism’s impact on traditional social values has not been as benign as its advocates would like us to believe. Despite the efforts of its modern defenders to distance themselves from its baleful social consequences, Darwinism’s connection with eugenics, abortion and racism is a matter of historical record, and the record is not pretty.” Dr. Jonathan Wells, biologist and author of The Politically Incorrect Guide to Darwinism and Intelligent Design This is the second Discovery Institute CSC fellow to appear on a Starbucks Coffee cup. The first was Wesley Smith. We need a cartoonist. How about a cartoon of Darwinists at Read More ›

Who are the (multiple) designers? James Shapiro offers some compelling answers

Is there only one Designer of life or are their multiple designers? Here is James Shapiro’s take: Bacteria are small but not stupid:
Cognition, natural genetic engineering, and sociobacteriology

Bacteria as natural genetic engineers….

This remarkable series of observations requires us to revise basic ideas about biological information processing and recognize that even the smallest cells are sentient beings.

In the case of engineered products we often might think of designers (plural) versus a designer (singular). It may be that some Ultimate Intelligence created the universe and (by way of extension) engineers. But even for those of us who accept that there is an Ultimate Intelligence, it is not customary to say that God made automobiles and airplanes and genetically engineered food.

Can we find proximal sources of intelligent design of life without appealing directly to the Ultimate Intelligence? Even though I personally believe God was the Ultimate Creator of the universe and hence even the creator of the Wright Brothers, I generally still identify airplanes as the proximal intelligent design of the Wright Brothers. A similar issue may arise in identifying the Designer or designers of life on Earth.
Read More ›

Why Darwin doesn’t matter….

Michael Shermer valiantly argued the thesis of his book, Why Darwin Matters in a debate with Bill Dembski, February 21, 2007.

Shermer said:

No one, and I mean no one, working in the field is debating whether natural selection is the driving force behind evolution.

Shermer defended his thesis honorably without resorting to any smear or ridicule of ID proponents. Nevertheless, despite his valor and commitment, Shermer fought and continues to fight a losing battle. A new book from MIT press controverts Shermer’s claims:

Natural selection is commonly interpreted as the fundamental mechanism of evolution. Questions about how selection theory can claim to be the all-sufficient explanation of evolution often go unanswered by today’s neo-Darwinists, perhaps for fear that any criticism of the evolutionary paradigm will encourage creationists and proponents of intelligent design.
Read More ›

“Bill Dembski is world famous” says creationism’s prodigal son Michael Shermer

I was at the Dembski-Shermer Debate at Bridgewater College in Bridgewater Virginia last night. I had the privilege of finally meeting both William Dembski and Michael Shermer for the first time in person. They spoke to a crowd of about 350 people from Bridgewater College, James Madison University, and the surrounding community. The crowd was diverse from high-school educated carpenters to PhD trained scientists and philosophers. Symbolic of the diverse mix of people was an American pastor of a rural church and his wife, a Russian laser physicist!

Dembski won the debate, but I must salute Shermer’s honorable and courageous performance in the face of overwhelming odds. Read More ›

[quote mine] “we regard as rather regrettable the conventional concatenation of Darwin’s name with evolution”

Here is a quote mine for the day which I found in an article Bill referenced earlier (see: Start the revolution without ID). The quote is by one of the world’s leading scientists, Carl Woese:

we regard as rather regrettable the conventional concatenation of Darwin’s name with evolution

I agree. Let me suggest that if the conventional concatenation is “Darwinian evolution” a better concatenation would be “designed evolution” or even (hehe) “created evolution”.
Read More ›

Flock of Dodos, or Pack of Lies?

In Flock of Dodos, or Pack of Lies?, Jonathan Wells describes how Darwinist Randy Olson filmed a scene to argue the point that Haeckel’s embryos are not in recent biology text books.

Olson concedes that the drawings are fraudulent, but he states on camera that “you don’t find them” in recent textbooks. In one scene, Olson hands Kansas attorney (and Darwin critic) John Calvert a recent biology textbook and challenges him to find Haeckel’s drawings in it. Taken by surprise, Calvert can’t do it. Afterwards, Olson displays a 1914 textbook containing the drawings but claims they haven’t been used since then. The film then compares Icons of Evolution to a supermarket tabloid.

Calvert later faxed Olson pages from a recent textbook containing Haeckel’s drawings, but Olson gives no hint of that in his film. Read More ›

Discovery Institute honoring Darwin via vidcast

Checkout the links to the vidcast of Darwin Day and the Deification of Charles Darwin Darwin Day is upon us at long last. Now for a full week humanists the world over will celebrate the birth of their saint, Charles Darwin. Celebrations come complete with Darwin carols celebrating atheism and sung to Christmas carol tunes; edible trees of life; Darwin look-a-like contests; and lots more revelry. Discovery Institute is honoring Darwin with a short vidcast of their popular ID The Future podcast titled “Darwin Day and the Deification of Charles Darwin.” It features CSC senior fellows Dr. John West and Dr. Jonathan Wells discussing the historical importance of Darwinism and its impact on modern science and society. Click here to Read More ›

How a young-earth creationist can get a PhD from a secular university

Until today, I’ve been keeping quiet about this developing story about Marcus Ross, a creationist PhD graduate from Rhode Island University. I wanted to protect him from media scrutiny until the news story finally broke.

Marcus Ross

Now that the NY Times has reported it, I may as well publicly extend my congratulations to Marcus Ross. He serves as a role model for how ID proponents and even young earth creationists can matriculate through Darwinist controlled institutions.
Read More ›

Another UK science professor stands up for ID

Stuart Burgess is Professor of design and nature in the department of mechanical engineering at Bristol University. He argues that intelligent design is as valid a scientific concept as evolution. …. I’ve been designing systems like spacecraft for more than 20 years. One of the lessons I’ve learnt is that complex systems require an immense amount of intelligence to design. I’ve seen a lot of irreducible complexity in engineering. I have also seen organs in nature that are apparently irreducible. An irreducibly complex organ is one where several parts are required simultaneously for the system to function usefully, so it cannot have evolved, bit by bit, over time. Against The Grain: ‘There are strong indications of intelligent design’ (HT: Nota Read More ›

Hoax of Dodos: another Darwinist caught in the act of misreporting and misrepresentation

Hoax of Dodos Randy Olson, who in his film Flock of Dodos portrays biologist Jonathan Wells as a fraud for claiming in the book Icons of Evolution (2000) that modern biology textbooks continued to reprint Haeckel-based drawings. But it turns out that Olson is the one who is promoting a fraud…. Olson must believe his viewers are a bunch of “dodos” if he believes they are going to fall for such a complete rewriting of history! Visit www.hoaxofdodos.com And watch this video Hoax of Dodos Video