Uncommon Descent Serving The Intelligent Design Community
Category

Culture

Historian Michael Flannery: There is much more Darwin doubt now than fifty years ago

Flannery: "Most interesting of all is the last essay by a noted historian and philosopher of biology, the late Jean Gayon, “What Future for Darwinism?” Against the centennial celebration, the question itself stands out as one that certainly wasn’t to be seriously asked in Chicago [in 1959]." Read More ›

“Moths’ ‘ears’ developed millions of years before bats” study is open access

Researchers: "We've thought for a long time that flowering plants must have contributed to the extraordinary number of moth and butterfly species we see today, but we haven't been able to test that. This study helps us see if prior hypotheses line up, and what we find is that the plant hypothesis does, but the bat hypothesis does not." Read More ›

How “single-study stories” build up science’s Neverland

A longstanding problem is that science writers tend to act as cheerleaders instead of constructive critics. Most of the probing questions that could have been asked about many hyped claims do not require advanced degrees, just a tendency to compare different teams’ findings and ask the tough questions. Read More ›

Two contradictory figures for the age of the Earth can be true at the same time?

Many of us simply avoid getting involved except to try to blunt the persecution of unpopular views. For one thing, it isn’t self-evident that geologists are always right either. I regret the fact that scientists were once ridiculed for believing that the Earth has tectonic plates. Read More ›

Eugenics and the “bad guy” in everyone but Darwin

This article about Francis Galton, Charles Darwin’s cousin, a key figure in the eugenics movement, manages to avoid mentioning Darwin, even though he was clearly among those Victorians for whom racism was a normal point of view. Read More ›

What? David Berlinski and Gunter Bechly reply to Jerry Coyne … at Quillette?

It would be fun to discuss the history of life for once without the dead hand of Darwin overruling all. From the looks of things, it may also be possible now. Read More ›

Karsten Pultz: The perils of talking about ID He wonders, should he give up?

I am seriously considering abandoning giving ID-talks in Christian settings, as it seems completely purposeless and because I find it exhausting, depressing and frustrating. While atheists and theistic evolutionists reject ID because they consider it creationism, the creationists reject ID because it is not creationism Read More ›

Re Jeffrey Epstein: Let’s not complicate the issues

Epstein wasn’t even a scientist. It wasn’t like trying to figure out how to deal with a Nazi who has a cure for cancer. Don’t let the people who are implicated invoke high and difficult questions to cloud over plain old wrongdoing. Read More ›

Discredited paper claiming that religious children are less generous is still cited in media

We love it. “Correction mechanisms in science can sometimes work slowly… ” Why does that remind us of “Nature has retracted a major oceans warning paper, after ten months of mass freakouts? The suspicion raised—and it is not unreasonable—is that the harm that wrong information does is useful to some parties. It’s almost like we sense the retraction coming conveniently after the damage is done. Read More ›