In case you missed this when it came out: http://www.uncommondescent.com/documentation/Berlinski_Darwinian_Doubts.pdf.
If the pop-culture is starting to understand the gross inadequacies of Neo-Darwinism to explain the origins and the diversity of life in this universe, perhaps a paradigm shift is closer than we think.
Many Darwinists are now finding that it no longer suits them to be called “Darwinists.” But, as we all know, calling a tail a leg doesn’t change that fact that a dog still only has four legs. Likewise, backing away from standard terminology and assigning to themselves other labels doesn’t change the fact that most Read More…
The charge is often made that ID constitutes an argument from ignorance (a charge I’ve shown to be false here). But a case can be made that conventional evolutionary theory, insofar as it tries to explain macroevolutionary changes, itself constitutes an argument from ignorance. In Gary Jason’s book Critical Thinking (p. 133), he characterizes the Read More…
My alumni/ae magazine, The University of Chicago Magazine, has a brief piece on me in its June 2005 issue (p. 58). It’s always interesting to see how one is perceived:
Discovery Institute Files Public Records Request in OSU Evolution Academic Freedom Case SEATTLE Ã¢â‚¬â€œ Discovery Institute has filed a public records request with the Ohio State University (OSU) seeking all documents related to Darwinist attacks on OSU doctoral candidate Bryan Leonard. The request was submitted under the Ohio Public Records Act.
media coverage of intelligent design has mostly failed to present your case on scientific grounds
For more than three decades, molecular evolutionists have thought that no matter how many genetic mutations show up on a specific gene, whether or not those mutations become fixed in the species is determined primarily by natural selection. The new study shows that the speed at which these new mutations arrive also affects whether the Read More…
Of all the professional wrestling moves, the piledriver most profoundly signifies how I conceive of the relation between ID and Darwin’s legacy. Think of the following image, therefore, as a metaphor of the ID movement:
Earlier on this blog, DaveScot cited Michael Shermer’s account of the Word Summit on Evolution that took place in the Galapagos Islands last month (go here for Shermer’s account in the Scientific American). TomG then raised the following question (for the thread in which he did so, go here):
Here’s an image I found amusing that someone sent me about my lack of faith in Darwinism. I’ve always wanted an image of Darwin and me as professional wrestlers with me doing a piledriver on him. If you’ve got the photoshop skills and more time on your hands than you know what to do with Read More…
Author Jack Cashill, veteran of the Kansas Darwinian controversies, has just published Hoodwinked: How Intellectual Hucksters Have Hijacked American Culture (Thomas Nelson, 2005). Cashill includes a chapter on “Darwin’s Heirs.” It’s available from Amazon for $16.49.
There are now a number of initiatives nationally in which evolution is being challenged and ID promoted. What would happen if the courts rule against ID, declaring it religion? In the long term, this prospect is of little consequence because the momentum is now with ID and the inertia with evolution.
Kathleen Hunt’s Talk.Origins FAQ on transitional vertebrate fossils has been available for years. The URL for that FAQ is http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/faq-transitional.html. You might enjoy comparing it with Richard Milton’s response at http://www.alternativescience.com/talk-origins-transitions.htm.
Many criticized the Darwinists for extrapolating too far, and now the Darwinists confess that actual, observable variation–whether in the barnyard or in nature–demonstrates only the capacity of a species population to vary within limits.