Evolution

CNN LARRY KING LIVE

Intelligent Design in American Classrooms?

Aired August 23, 2005 – 21:00 ET Read More ›

ID-phobe bloggers are upset with the NYTimes article yesterday by Kenneth Chang (for the article, go here; for a partial list of upset ID-phobe bloggers, go here). Brian Leiter, for instance, commends a letter by Edouard Machery to the New York Times (unpublished as yet), which remarks, “In no other industrialized country is evolution a controversial fact. ” Let me humbly suggest that Machery is merely underscoring the backwardness of these industrialized countries in unmasking the most oversold and undersupported theory in the history of ideas. God Bless America!

August 22, 2005 In Explaining Life’s Complexity, Darwinists and Doubters Clash By KENNETH CHANG http://www.nytimes.com/2005/08/22/national/22design.html?pagewanted=print

http://theage.com.au/text/articles/2005/08/17/1123958129538.html?oneclick=true

The first of two New York Times articles on ID: go here. This one by Jodi Wilgoren covers the political aspects of the debate. An upcoming one by Kenneth Chang focuses on the science.

I’ve been assured that the moneys will be deposited in my Cayman account, so I’m back. The first thing I want to direct your attention to is the letter by the Office of Special Counsel to Richard Sternberg: http://www.rsternberg.net/OSC_ltr.htm. Compare this with the spin that Nick Matzke and the NCSE are trying to put on this affair: http://www.pandasthumb.org/archives/2005/08/sternberg_compl.html. Compare also Mike Gene’s commentary at Telic Thoughts: go here.

Why ‘Theology Is a Simple Muddle’ By Lee Harris Published 08/19/2005 As one of my colleagues put it: “Twenty thousand words! And so far as I can tell, he has never read *anything* by comtemporary design theorists. Yet he proposes a way to reconcile ID to Neo-Darwinism. Maybe he should find out what he’s trying to reconcile first. ”

Evolutionists in a panic
Aug 17, 2005
By R. Albert Mohler Jr.
Baptist Press

Read More ›

Editor Explains Reasons for ‘Intelligent Design’ Article By Michael Powell Washington Post Staff Writer Friday, August 19, 2005; Page A19 Evolutionary biologist Richard Sternberg made a fateful decision a year ago. As editor of the hitherto obscure Proceedings of the Biological Society of Washington, Sternberg decided to publish a paper making the case for “intelligent design,” a controversial theory that holds that the machinery of life is so complex as to require the hand — subtle or not — of an intelligent creator. MORE

Michael Shermer had an op-ed in the LA Times a week and a half ago. I’m reprinting a fuller version of it here with his permission and including some commentary in italics. Thanks, Michael. Read More ›

Amazon reviews of ID books tend to be either very positive or very negative. I was just looking to see how Uncommon Dissent: Intellectuals Who Find Darwinism Unconvincing was doing, and saw that every single review was either 5 stars (the highest rating) or 1 star (the lowest rating). The 1-star reviews are illuminating for their depth and insight. I include them here for your edification: Read More ›

Mark Perakh has weighed in with yet another screed against my work (go here). He seems out of his element. I’m still awaiting his detailed critique of “Searching Large Spaces” — does he even understand the relevant math?

Evolution: Debate it
By John Angus Campbell and Stephen C. Meyer

Read More ›

I expect Harvard will have as much success resolving the origin of life problem as they have winning the NCAA men’s basketball championship. Harvard Jumps Into Evolution Debate CAMBRIDGE, Mass. — Harvard University is joining the long-running debate over the theory of evolution by launching a research project to study how life began. To view the entire Washington Post article, go here.

In the blue corner, God. In the red corner, Evolution. Will they kiss and make up or will they punch each other’s teeth out? Find out at the Pandasthumb: http://www.pandasthumb.org/archives/2005/08/julian_sanchez.html http://www.pandasthumb.org/archives/2005/08/my_response_to.html