William Dembski

Here’s an invitation I just received. I wish I could go. Onward and upward!

David Klinghoffer reviews Francis Collins’s new book The Language of God: . . . Collins’s book rejects Intelligent Design as an “argument from personal incredulity.” That argument, in his telling, would go this way: We don’t understand exactly how the Darwinian mechanism could have produced certain aspects of biological information; therefore, a Designer must have done it. I believe Collins misrepresents Intelligent Design, and it appears that he hasn’t followed the latest rounds in the scientific debate. But never mind. Let’s assume he’s right and ask: If Darwinism is the true resolution of the “mystery of mysteries,” where does that leave God? . . . Source: http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Protected/Articles/000/000/012/542pbkmy.asp Incredulity suggests disbelief in the face of overwhelming evidence. But if there is Read More ›

Ten years ago it seemed to some that we had good evidence for life on Mars. Here’s how things look today: http://www.physorg.com/news74002665.html.

Can You Say Hidden Agenda? by Jason Miller August 6, 2006 at 21:17:33 The Discovery Institute’s True Raison d’être and Why We Need to Be Deeply Concerned Discovery Institute, a Seattle-based think tank which champions socially conservative causes, has become heavily invested in the “debate” between Darwinists and those who wish to introduce Intelligent Design into public school classrooms. According to their Website, Discovery’s stated mission is: “… to make a positive vision of the future practical. The Institute discovers and promotes ideas in the common sense tradition of representative government, the free market and individual liberty.” Finding a handful of academics willing to act as its shills, Discovery’s ultimate goal is to subvert the prevailing paradigm of modern science Read More ›

The gods must be crazy if they call this intelligence
Robyn Williams insists the intelligent design movement is as sinister as it is wrong, writes Deborah Smith.

ROBYN WILLIAMS’S heart sank this week when he listened to people from Toowoomba on the radio blithely rejecting the latest scientific evidence on the quality of recycled water in favour of the myths.

It was as if science was just another choice of product on a supermarket shelf they could ignore at will, says the ABC science broadcaster. “People simply say, ‘I don’t want to know that. It’s inconvenient’.”

The prevalence of this attitude has been playing on Williams’s mind as he ponders the way the intelligent design movement – creationism’s “belligerent teenage cousin” – has sprung up “like a boil on a bum”. One of its hallmarks, he says, is the arrogant dismissal of carefully weighed scientific evidence.

Until recently Williams had thought it unwise to give any more publicity to intelligent design – the notion that life is too complex to have evolved without some assistance from an intelligent designer, whom many adherents believe to be God.

But its well-resourced backing in the US, from the President, George Bush, down, and its spread here – it is taught in science classes in about 100 schools, he estimates – has finally forced him into print.

He pulls no punches. Intelligent design is a politically sinister movement, a form of terrorism focused on public education, he argues in a new book, Unintelligent Design – Why God Isn’t as Smart as She Thinks She Is. “The means are devious, the arguments deceitful and the consequences profound.” Read More ›

Note especially the opening segment by Donohue:

What can I say? Michael Shermer is a mensch!  . . . In a refreshing departure from the personal animosity that characterizes much of the evolution-ID conflict, Shermer notes that he has had amicable debates, and shared friendly meals and car rides, with mathematician-philosopher William A. Dembski and other ID proponents. . . . MORE: “Intelligent Debate” by Kenneth Silber for TCSDaily

I want to invite on this thread names of past scientists who thought Darwinism was B.S. along with evidence showing that they did indeed think this. Me first: Wolfgang Pauli. Check out pp27-28 at http://www.igpp.de/english/tda/pdf/paulijcs.pdf.

Professor Ratzinger goes back to school. After Islam last year, Darwin topic this year Evolution will be the focus of the upcoming seminar between the pope and his former students in Castel Gandolfo. Meanwhile, Jesuit scholar Christian W. Troll has updated his analysis of progressive Muslim thinkers by Sandro Magister ROMA, August 2, 2006 – This year’s Ratzinger-Schülerkreis seminar will focus on “Schöpfung und Evolution”, creation and evolution. The private meeting is set for Saturday, September 2, and Sunday, September 3, at the Pontifical Villa in the pope’s summer residence of Castel Gandolfo (see photo). The Ratzinger-Schülerkreis, that is the ‘Ratzinger Students’ Circle’, brings together once a year the old theology professor, now pope Benedict XVI, and his former students Read More ›

Go here for the full pdf: https://uncommondescent.com/documentation/Judge_Jones_Peer_Rev_Reb.pdf. Go here for the full pdf: https://uncommondescent.com/documentation/Judge_Jones_Peer_Rev_Reb.pdf.

Since 1999, Kansas has now swung four times on the question of science standards and whether evolutionary theory should be properly scrutinized or swallowed whole. Below is the latest. This war will not be decided by courts, legislators, or school boards, but by young people as they wake up to the fact that dogmatic Darwinists have been systematically indoctrinating and disenfranchising them. Just as the counterculture of the 60s overturned the status quo, so a new counterculture, with high school, college, and university students taking the lead, will overturn the Darwinian status quo.

Evolution Opponents Lose in Kansas Primary
By John Hanna
Associated Press
posted: 02 August 2006
09:56 am ET

TOPEKA, Kan. (AP) — Conservative Republicans who pushed anti-evolution standards back into Kansas schools last year have lost control of the state Board of Education once again.   Read More ›

Here is an email I received from a troll just after I started posting Jim Downard’s asinine emails to me. Presumably the troll wanted me to post the email as is. I am posting it, but without incriminating a prominent anti-ID proponent, whose career I was supposed to place in jeopardy, but which would have backfired on me. Note that I emailed “Concerned Scientist” twice (never a reply):

Email 1 (7.12.06): “I’m not sure what to believe. In this age of computers and hard drives it makes no sense to me that you didn’t keep a back-up of your project. Absent that, you need to reconstruct it and show it to me before we can take a next step. –WmAD”

Email 2 (7.14.06): “Unless I hear back from you in short order with some solid evidence that the story you gave below is true (e.g., transcript with “F” for course from [snip–prominent anti-ID proponent], I’m going to conclude that you are a troll and will use your letter any way I see fit. –WmAD”

Date: Tue, 11 Jul 2006 12:32:06 -0700 (PDT)
From: Concerned Scientist < concernedscientist23@yahoo.com>
Subject: Supression of an ID Experiment
To: [snip]@designinference.com

Dr. Dembski,

I recently graduated from the University of [snip],
with a major in computer science and a minor
in economics.  I originally planned to minor in
biology, and it is the disgraceful events that led me
to change this that I wish to share with you.  The
events I describe here took place between the early
fall of 2004 and fall of 2005, however I had feared
repercussions from the University if I had stepped
forward.  I have now graduated and been accepted into
a graduate program in another state, so I have come up
with the courage to speak. Read More ›

From the Lockheed Martin newsletter at http://www.lockheedmartin.com/data/assets/10051.pdf:    

More student activism to unmask evolutionary pretensions:  MYSPACE: http://www.myspace.com/evolutionquestions XANGA: http://www.xanga.com/evolutionquestions LIVEJOURNAL: http://evoquestions.livejournal.com BLOGSPOT: http://www.evolutionquestions.blogspot.com