Evolution

In The Design Revolution, I characterized theory change as follows: Read More ›

Richard Sternberg, Guillermo Gonzalez, Caroline Crocker. Is there a pattern? Go here. Note especially this story about Gonzalez: go here.

According to the 26Aug2005 issue of THE WEEK (p. 20), “Researchers at Cornell University tested the effect of insecurity on men’s attitudes by giving a survey on gender identity to about 50 men. The men were then told that an analysis of the survey showed that they exhibited ‘weak’ male characteristics — indeed, that their attitudes were effeminate. Read More ›

Lehigh University biologists have, just shy of a consensus, condemned intelligent design (the lone dissenter — surprise, surprise — is Michael Behe). The various anti-ID blogs (go here and here) are crowing about this, as though this vindicates their criticism of ID and, to boot, must somehow be disconcerting to us.

Quite the contrary. Read More ›

Now and again I receive irate emails. The funniest of these come from Peter Pajakowski, who makes me appreciate the Polish jokes I heard growing up in Chicago. For the record, I have no shame, enjoy the attacks of critics, and think I’m completely right. So there.

Enjoy the following two letters: Read More ›

Taking Darwin Down
Emma Schwartz

Legal Times (http://www.legaltimes.com)
08-29-2005

Read More ›

From an ID supporter (let’s hope he is right): Read More ›

Lehigh prof draws fire over intelligent design
By Christina Gostomski

The Allentown Morning Call, Pennsylvania
August 22, 2005 Monday

As a newly minted Ph.D., Michael Behe, like many young biochemists, dreamed of one day joining the distinguished and highly coveted ranks of the National Academy of Scientists. Read More ›

http://www.wolfmanproductions.com/iddebate.html

Richard Sternberg interviewed by Bill O’Reilly on August 24, 2005: for transcript, go here.

[In July, George Will, a columnist I enjoy and find insightful on so many topics, weighed in on ID — go here. I’ve been meaning to respond to his remarks on ID for some time now.] Read More ›

Duane Smith is another blogger complaining about Kenneth Chang’s NYTimes piece on ID. According to Smith (go here), in admitting that ID raises questions of real scientific merit, Chang’s article redistributes the burden of proof when in fact “the burden of proof is on Intelligent Design creationism and not mainstream science.” Read More ›

The current issue of More, a women’s magazine aimed at women over 40, contains a profile of Eugenie Scott in which she is quoted as saying, “I’ve become an evolution evangelist.” Could someone please explain how evolution constitutes “good news”?