Uncommon Descent Serving The Intelligent Design Community
Category

Darwinism

Type
post
Author
William Dembski
Date
May 30, 2005
Categorized
Darwinism, Evolution, Intelligent Design

JW Montgomery weighs in against Orr

William Dembski
May 30, 2005
Darwinism, Evolution, Intelligent Design
If (as Orr claims) I.D. “looks less and less like the science it claimed to be and more and more like an extended exercise in polemics,” isn’t it strange that it has recently convinced the foremost secular philosopher in England (Antony Flew) to give up his atheism? Read More ›
Type
post
Author
William Dembski
Date
May 30, 2005
Categorized
Darwinism, Evolution, Intelligent Design

ID in a Wiley Math Textbook

William Dembski
May 30, 2005
Darwinism, Evolution, Intelligent Design
A good Darwinist will imagine 2 or 3 far-fetched intermediate useful stages, and consider the problem solved. I believe you would need to find thousands of intermediate stages before this example of irreducible complexity has been reduced to steps small enough to be bridged by single random mutations Read More ›
Type
post
Author
William Dembski
Date
May 26, 2005
Categorized
Darwinism, Evolution, Intelligent Design

Two Gifts for Richard Dawkins

William Dembski
May 26, 2005
Darwinism, Evolution, Intelligent Design
the fossils of the “Cambrian Explosion” period, near the base of the geological column, include some of the most sophisticated eyes ever known to have existed — the compound eyes of trilobites have double calcite lenses, which defeat any slow evolutionary explanation, and, what is more, they have no precursor in the rocks Read More ›
Type
post
Author
William Dembski
Date
May 24, 2005
Categorized
Darwinism, Evolution, Intelligent Design

Allen Orr’s Piece in the New Yorker

William Dembski
May 24, 2005
Darwinism, Evolution, Intelligent Design

Allen Orr’s article against ID is now out in the New Yorker (go here). It’s as bad as I thought it would be. I’m on the road right now but will comment on it later in the week. Note that I remarked last week on this blog that a fact-checker from the New Yorker had contacted me about this article. It doesn’t appear that the time I spent with this fact-checker did much to improve this article.

Type
post
Author
William Dembski
Date
May 19, 2005
Categorized
Darwinism, Evolution

Evolutionary Logic

William Dembski
May 19, 2005
Darwinism, Evolution
Evolutionary logic has a further advantage, namely, the results are not required to be true, thus eliminating a tiresome (and now superfluous) restriction on the growth of evolutionary knowledge. Read More ›