Uncommon Descent Serving The Intelligent Design Community
Category

Darwinism

Type
post
Author
Denyse O'Leary
Date
November 6, 2020
Categories
Culture
Darwinism
Intelligent Design
Science
Tagged
, , ,

When science becomes fiction, it often appears happy with the transformation

News
November 6, 2020
Culture, Darwinism, Intelligent Design, Science
2
Re "attempts to silence naysayers": Seriously, at least half of all Darwinism in print would likely be discredited if naysayers were given a respectful hearing. Sure, some of it is salvageable but without honest critique from outside Fort Darwin, how would you know which half? Read More ›
Type
post
Author
Denyse O'Leary
Date
October 28, 2020
Categories
Culture
Darwinism
Intelligent Design
Irreducible Complexity
Tagged
, , ,

What? An honest admission about the bacterial flagellum from Darwin-driven biology?

News
October 28, 2020
Culture, Darwinism, Intelligent Design, Irreducible Complexity
2
Researchers: "To build the machinery that enables bacteria to swim, over 50 proteins have to be assembled according to a logic and well-defined order to form the flagellum, the cellular equivalent of an offshore engine of a boat." They ADMIT this? It sounds like a Recovery Meeting. Read More ›
Type
post
Author
Denyse O'Leary
Date
October 18, 2020
Categories
Culture
Darwinism
Intelligent Design
Tagged
,

A humanities scholar gets a clue about what Darwinism IS

News
October 18, 2020
Culture, Darwinism, Intelligent Design
2
Amazing! Hey, here, we were all waiting for Freestone to try out the CLUNK!! on us: “If you believe in God, well, rejoice! God can use Darwinism too!” Luckily, we didn’t hear it. We are sick of certifying idiots. For one thing, we've run out of certificates. And anyhow, Freestone doesn’t sound like an idiot. Read More ›
Type
post
Author
Denyse O'Leary
Date
October 17, 2020
Categories
Darwinism
Evolution
horizontal gene transfer
Intelligent Design
Tagged
,

Watching microorganisms bend “the rules” of evolution

News
October 17, 2020
Darwinism, Evolution, horizontal gene transfer, Intelligent Design
3
Researchers: “It was previously thought that the only genes that could spread through a population were those that caused a benefit 'right now' (in the environment that the population is experiencing at that point in time).” That’s Darwinism. And Darwinism is becoming comprehensively out of date. Read More ›
Type
post
Author
Denyse O'Leary
Date
October 15, 2020
Categories
Darwinism
Evolution
Intelligent Design
Tagged
,

(Reformed) New Scientist 13: We can stop evolution

News
October 15, 2020
Darwinism, Evolution, Intelligent Design
6
New Scientist: “Today, evolution remains one of the most powerful ideas in science but, as with all good ideas, it is evolving ” Sure, but if evolution is evolving, Darwinism is dead. Which is fine with us. It’s a big world out there. Making everything sound like Darwin said it is not the way to explore that world. Read More ›
Type
post
Author
Denyse O'Leary
Date
October 12, 2020
Categories
Darwinism
Intelligent Design
Peer review
Tagged
, , , ,

Now the Journal of Theoretical Biology is publishing a rebuttal letter to the design-friendly paper

News
October 12, 2020
Darwinism, Intelligent Design, Peer review
3
Which is fine in principle. But be realistic. The Darwin mob, an early flowering of Cancel Culture, will not be satisfied with anything less than retraction and the obliteration of the careers of everyone involved. If that is accomplished by scandalously spurious means, all the better for the mob. That increases its sense of power and self-justification. Saying NO! To them is an act of liberation. Read More ›
Type
post
Author
Denyse O'Leary
Date
October 12, 2020
Categories
Darwinism
Intelligent Design
speciation
Tagged
, ,

(Reformed) New Scientist 12: Evolution favors some outcomes, not others

News
October 12, 2020
Darwinism, Intelligent Design, speciation
6
So “Each lake contains many different species that show striking similarities in the variety of body shapes to species in the other lake, despite being more closely related to those living in their own lake” but “These body shapes adapt species to particular niches or diets, so must have evolved by natural selection.” But wait! The traditional argument for natural selection acting on random mutations (Darwinism) was that the species WOULD BE similar to more closely related species. If they’re not, … Read More ›
Type
post
Author
Denyse O'Leary
Date
October 11, 2020
Categories
Darwinism
Intelligent Design
Peer review
Tagged
, , ,

Here’s the Twitter discussion of that ID-friendly paper at the Journal of Theoretical Biology

News
October 11, 2020
Darwinism, Intelligent Design, Peer review
1
The Darwinist commenters below the tweet would put one in mind of coyotes except that coyotes must, perforce, have pack standards. They can’t just howl ANYTHING they please... Well, we shall see what happens next. Read More ›
Type
post
Author
Denyse O'Leary
Date
October 5, 2020
Categories
Darwinism
Evolution
Genetics
Intelligent Design
Tagged
, ,

(Reformed) New Scientist 9: Survival of the Luckiest

News
October 5, 2020
Darwinism, Evolution, Genetics, Intelligent Design
5
At New Scientist: “But evolution can also occur through a non-adaptive process called genetic drift, whereby a gene may become dominant in a population purely by chance… ‘Genetic drift can definitely be a significant driver of evolution,’ says Miles.” Read More ›