Evolution

How can we assert the great American novel The Right Stuff has near 100% sequence similarity with Mirriam Webster’s Dictionary? Simple, take the words in the dictionary and find identical words in the novel, and you’ll find the spelling is 100% identical in most cases! Would you then use such an illegitimate method to argue humans share a close genetic identity with fish. Apparently Darwinists are quite willing to do exactly that. Consider this recent paper: The African coelacanth genome provides insights into tetrapod evolution which concludes: Through a phylogenomic analysis, we conclude that the lungfish, and not the coelacanth, is the closest living relative of tetrapods. The paper goes on and on about how closely related we are based Read More ›

Did a creationist actually say this? phylogenetic methods as they exist now can only rigorously detect sister-group relationships, not direct ancestry, No, it was Nick Matzke at Panda’s thumb 🙂 But a creationist did say: you get sister groups with no parent explicitly shown. Platonic forms do not suggest we evolved from fish 😯 Not much difference between what Matzke said and I said! I’ve been telling him that since 2006, and now he finally acknowledges it publicly. I’ve said that it was creationists (like Linnaeus) before Darwin’s time who lumped humans along with the primates, and the primates along with the mammals, etc. The creationists perceived the “sister groups” with no physical ancestor (which suggests the “parent” was an Read More ›

Matt Ridley, author of the book “Genome: the Autobiography of a Species in 23 Chapters” (2006 Harper Perennial) is known to be a brilliant propagandist of Darwin. Perhaps also for this reason the Wall Street Journal gives him the opportunity to periodically write articles on this topic. In one of these, Ridley candidly writes: “Biological evolution, too, is anti-fragile. The death of unfit individuals is what causes a species to adapt and improve. Some could wrongly interpret here the “improvement” in a minor, reductive sense. In truth, Ridley, like all evolutionists, when speaks of “improvement” of species dreams its major all-comprehensive sense, nothing less than biological macroevolution of all species starting from the “primordial soup”, in other words, the “molecules-to-man” Read More ›

Over at his Why Evolution is True website, the infamous Jerry Coyne has given his lame excuses for not wanting to take up a genuine offer from ENV’s David Klinghoffer to debate and discuss Steve Meyer’s latest Book Darwin’s Doubt as well as discussing anything else Darwin related.  In his “I’m too busy and important to do that’ rant he writes: You ID advocates can also make your case, but the website rules are that we can then ask, before you post further, about your evidence for God The Intelligent Designer. This is the last time I’ll be engaging the Discovery Institute directly on these issues. DIers are not scientists but religious zealots concealing clerical collars beneath threadbare lab coats. I Read More ›

In the comments of this UD post from yesterday, (comment #21) I referred to Nick Matzke’s rant over at the Panda’s Thumb yesterday as yet another illustration of the double standard’s Matzke’s has when it comes to his critiques of anyone who dares challenge Darwinian Orthodoxy.  In my comments yesterday, I gave an example of Matzke being guilty of the very same thing he (falsely)accuses Meyer of doing.  Today, I want to call out Matzke on another of his famous ploys: the bluff!  In earlier days, before he gained his current status among the defenders of the Darwinian Faith, Matzke posted and commented on various ID sites under various pseudonyms.  His favorite ploy was to use what we came to Read More ›

A visual artist and a Ph.D. in computational genomics have gotten together to predict what we mere human mortals will look like in, say, 100,000 years. Given the prediction, I for one am glad I won’t be around to see it actually happen. The current design appeals to me much more. But maybe others will feel differently.

Our old friend PZ Myers holds school boards in utter contempt. In a recent blog post at his widely followed Pharyngula blog site, he takes contemptuous pot shots at the Springboro, OH School Board for having the audacity to even consider a “critical thinking” policy in the curriculum. The Springboro Community City School District is considering a so-called “critical thinking” policy that would require teachers to explore “all sides” of controversial issues. The proposed policy change would direct teachers to discuss creation science or intelligent design when teaching about the theory of evolution. <a href=”http://www.rawstory.com/rs/201…..-proposal/ Full story here. PZ can’t restrain his contempt: Please. There is no controversy here. Evolution happened, teach it. The best argument that one student provided Read More ›