Evolution

HT: David Coppedge In all the debates about the status of Archaeopteryx between reptiles and birds, no one till now expected this wild idea: it lost its ability to fly. Michael Habib (Univ. of Southern California) raised eyebrows in Los Angeles last week when he told a packed house at the Society of Vertebrate Paleontology meeting that he believes Archaeopteryx was secondarily flightless. Nature News reported, The idea that it was instead evolving to lose its flight and becoming flightless again, or ‘secondarily flightless’, occurred to Habib while he was calculating limb ratios and degrees of feather symmetry in Archaeopteryx, and comparing the values to those of living birds, to better understand its flying ability. In doing so, he found Read More ›

Bacteria demonstrate intra-species communication that is species specific using a partner with a communication molecule. Bacteria are also “multilingual” with a generic trade language for interspecies communication. Bacteria control tasks by signal producing and receiving receptors with a signal carrier. The tasks bacteria conduct depend on the concentration they sense of self bacteria versus generic species concentration. e.g. Bacteria control pathogenicity with quorum sensing. The detailed (small) sRNA required for these control mechanisms is now beginning to be desciphered. See below. Question:
Did bacteria “invent” their communication and control methods via evolutionary stochastic processes?
Or do these constitute Complex Specified Information and thus evidence design? Read More ›

It seems we can now put together at least a draft outline composite response to the UD pro-darwinism essay challenge of a year ago, based on Jerad’s remarks at 70 in the one-year anniversary thread, and a key concession by EL at 149 in the same. In the interests of moving the discussion on the merits forward [I am open to improved drafts or a full form submission . . . ], first here is the Smithsonian chart of the Tree of Life, the context: Now, PART I: ____________ EL, 149: >> “As yet we have no empirically supported naturalistic theory of abiogenesis.” >> ____________ For PART II, we will need to highlight that Jerad is responding to some earlier remarks Read More ›

By now, I’m sure most of you have heard about the academic freedom controversy surrounding Ball State University and the investigation of physics professor, Eric Hedin (pronounced he-deen).  Discovery Institute’s Evolution News and Views has published several stories over the past few weeks, most notably this, this, this and this.  (Articles on the entire saga can be found here.) Today, the DI launched a new web-page so you can help get the message of academic freedom to the BSU Board of Trustees.  If you believe in academic freedom, like I do, then please take a look at the page and add your voice.  The kind of treatment foisted upon Prof. Hedin is what you might expect in a totalitarian regime, Read More ›

While having lunch at ICC 2013 with biologist and genetic engineer Robert Carter and the unnamed evolutionary biologist who got laughed off stage (let us call him Erik), I raised a question which the evolutionary biologist and other Darwinists (including Michael Lynch) have not provided satisfactory answers for, namely, “what is the evolutionary simulation that will resolve problems of speed limits of evolution, cost of substitution, rate of substitution, neutral evolution, Haldane’s dilemma, Muller’s ratchet, Haldane’s ratchet, Kondrashov’s question, mutational meltdown, etc?” John Sanford, Walter ReMine, John Baumgardner, Wes Brewer, Paul Gibson, Robert Carter, others created Mendel’s Accountant. Erik kept lambasting the program, “did you model recombination, do you model variable population sizes, do you model linkage, synergistic epistasis, truncation Read More ›