William Dembski

The first paragraph of the following quote appeared in a comment to Gil Dodgen’s post on the Quinn v. Dawkins debate on Irish radio. The succeeding paragraph is quite illuminating and included here. Question: What evidence (since Dawkins is so big on evidence) would help us to decide whether attributing responsibility to others for their actions is simply an adaptive device fobbed off on us by evolution or a reflection of an underlying moral structure to the universe (sometimes called “natural law” or “higher law”)? But doesn’t a truly scientific, mechanistic view of the nervous system make nonsense of the very idea of responsibility, whether diminished or not? Any crime, however heinous, is in principle to be blamed on antecedent Read More ›

George Levine has a new book, Darwin Loves You. The book is silly and superficial, and would not be worth notice except that it serves as Exhibit A for the fact that Darwinism has become a religion, or at least, a “comprehensive doctrine” in the sense of Rawls (John, not Lou), and hence NOT something that a liberal democracry ought to impose on its citizens by force, as is happening now.

http://www.bcseweb.org.uk/index.php/Main/TruthInScienceMaterial … now receiving support from its colonial counterpart, the NCSE.

I just received this press release. I want to encourage conversation here about its accuracy and significance. PRESS RELEASE Wednesday, October 11th was an historic day in the life of the European Parliament. Polish member of the European Parliament, Maciej Giertych, retired head of the Genetics Department of the Polish Academy of Science, and father of Polish Deputy Prime Minister, Roman Giertych, introduced a public seminar on the General Theory of Evolution to fellow MEP’s. Professor Giertych questioned the value of teaching a continually falsified hypothesis – macroevolution – to students throughout Europe, as well as pointing out its lack of usefulness in regard to scientific endeavour. Professor Giertych introduced the subject by relating how his children had returned home Read More ›

Read the following and ask yourself which side in the ID vs. Darwinism debate exhibits the groupthink syndrome: The groupthink syndrome: Review of the major symptoms Source: http://www.swans.com/library/art9/xxx099.html In order to test generalization about the conditions that increase the chances of groupthink, we must operationalize the concept of groupthink by describing the symptoms to which it refers. Eight main symptoms run through the case studies of historic fiascoes. Each symptom can be identified by a variety of indicators, derived from historical records, observer’s accounts of conversations, and participants’ memoirs. The eight symptoms of groupthink are: 1. an illusion of invulnerability, shared by most or all the members, which creates excessive optimism and encourages taking extreme risks; 2. collective efforts to Read More ›

On October 12, Jonathan Wells spoke opposite Skeptic magazine editor Michael Shermer at the Cato Institute in Washington, DC. Shermer was promoting his new book, Why Darwin Matters: The Case Against Intelligent Design, and Wells was promoting his book, The Politically Incorrect Guide to Darwinism and Intelligent Design.

Shermer appears to be a favorite of the Cato Institute. In his book he writes (on p. 138): “Evolution [by which he means a blind materialistic form of it] provides a scientific foundation for the core values shared by most Christians and conservatives, and by accepting — and embracing — the theory of evolution, Christians and conservatives strengthen their religion, their politics, and science itself.”

At this event, Shermer spoke first, then Wells followed. Wells’s prepared remarks are given below. Shermer and Wells then answered questions from the audience. The event was filmed by C-Span Book Channel, and is scheduled to air on TV next weekend, October 21-22.

Check out this great looking website (if only the content matched in quality): http://richarddawkins.net. Anybody who is willing and able to upgrade the look, feel, and functionality of this site (Uncommon Descent) to match that of the Dawkins site will receive three of my books autographed. What a deal. Think it over.

In his 2003 paper, “How far are we from a quantum theory of gravity?” especially p. 49. Lee Smolin invokes the no free lunch theorem to argue that in searching for the minimum of a complicated but unknown potential there is no chance of doing better than a random search unless the search algorithm has built into it some very definite information about the function itself. The paper is widely available online (e.g., http://arxiv.org/PS_cache/hep-th/pdf/0303/0303185.pdf). There’s not much difference here between Smolin’s argument against string theory and ID arguments against natural selection. I have yet to read the new books by Woit and Smolin, but I’m told it is astonishing how closely the controversies over string theory reflect the controversies of Read More ›

Yes, this is the same Chris Mooney who attacks ID and has written THE REPUBLICAN WAR ON SCIENCE: Chris Mooney ’99 recently spoke at the National Press Club in Washington, D.C., on behalf of the Campus Freethought Alliance (CFA). Mooney, who is copresident and a founding member of the Yale College Society for Humanists, Atheists and Agnostics, addressed the issue of discrimination against those who don’t believe in God. Mooney interned with the CFA over the summer, where he helped draft the organization’s “Bill of Rights for Unbelievers.” Source: http://www.yale.edu/opa/ybc/campusnotes.html.

Are we talking religious fundamentalists or Darwinian fundamentalists? The Fundamentalist Attack on Science: A Problem That Won’t Just Disappear Morris, Stephen (2006) The Fundamentalist Attack on Science: A Problem That Won’t Just Disappear. In [PSA 2006] Philosophy of Science Assoc. 20th Biennial Mtg (Vancouver): PSA 2006 Contributed Papers. Full text available as: http://philsci-archive.pitt.edu/archive/00002954/01/IDPSA.doc.

I debated Lee Silver last year at Princeton and reported it on this blog (for a video of the debate, go here). Silver is a Princeton bioethicist with a Ph.D. in biology. He and Peter Singer are soulmates. Fundamentalists? We? Bad science, worse philosophy, and McCarthyite tactics in the human-embyro debate. An essay by Patrick Lee & Robert P. George We have in many places argued for the humanity and fundamental dignity of human beings in the embryonic stage of development and all later stages. In defending embryonic human life, we have pointed out that every human adult was once an embryo, just as he or she was once an adolescent, and before that a child, and before that an Read More ›

This story has been of ongoing interest. Here is the latest.

SSHRC doubts the science of evolution
In rejecting a proposed study, the eminent science council shows it has become infected with postmodern drivel
By Dan Adleman

In the summer issue of Humanist Perspectives, Gary Bauslaugh reports that the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council (SSHRC) has rejected Dr Brian Alters’ application for a grant to study the “detrimental effects of popularizing anti-evolution’s ‘Intelligent Design Theory’ on Canadian students, teachers, parents, administrators and policymakers.” Read More ›

I just learned the following from a colleague in Finland: 1. The first Finnish edition of your book [i.e., Intelligent Design] has been sold out (1500 copies) 2. 30% of Finns do not believe in Evolution — which shocked our educators Both statistics are surprising. Finland is a country of only about 3,000,000, so proportionately the book has way outsold its American counterpart (which sold about 60,000 copies here). Also, for a country as atheistic and materialistic as Finland, to have this level of disbelief in standard evolutionary theory is indeed shocking.

On Friday evening, September 29, 2006, several of us (Mike Behe, Jonathan Wells, Ralph Seelke and I — I was a last minute add on) spoke to a crowd of almost 4,000 people at the University of South Florida’s Sun Dome in Tampa, usually devoted to sports events such as basketball games. The event was sponsored by Physicians and Surgeons for Scientific Integrity (PSSI). It was organized by Tom Woodward (author of Doubts About Darwin), Rich Akin, and some hard-working volunteers. The audience consisted mainly of people interested in learning about ID — students, faculty, and parents. There were a few Darwinists present, who contented themselves largely with handing out leaflets (“ID Is Not Science”) and shouting “Darwin” as they Read More ›

The Darwinists have had your young people long enough to shape, subvert, and corrupt. Send them to www.overwhelmingevidence.com and mobilize this sleeping giant! The old guard is not going to change. The hope of the future lies with our youth. The new overwhelmingevidence.com site is modeled on Xanga and Myspace and aimed at concentrating the power of youth to throw off the indoctrination that is being shoved down their throats by groups like the NCSE and enforced by inept judicial rulings like those of Judge Jones (note the image of Jones on the splash page). The NCSE, the ACLU, Jones, etc. have effectively disenfranchised our young people when it comes to the teaching of biological origins. Today’s high school and Read More ›