Uncommon Descent Serving The Intelligent Design Community
Category

Intelligent Design

Design arguments Does bad design mean no design?

In Of Designers and Dunces, Roddy Bullock entertaininglyly addresses the claim made by Professor Donald Wise of the University of Massachusetts that defects in the human body show that there is no design in nature. Unwise person: I’ll admit it’s art, but it’s bad art. Wise person: But you will agree that it is the work of an artist. Yes? Unwise person: No. A “bad design” claim, if sustainable, might come better from a medical doctor than a geologist, but medical doctors do not appear to be among materialism/Darwinism’s fans.

Intellectual freedom: Do we have to fight that battle all over again?

We wrestle with significant questions regarding the mind and the brain: Is the mind an illusion? Is it merely the buzz created by neurons? Is it an immaterial reality? One thing we will certainly need to sort all this out is academic freedom: Pundit David Horowitz brings us up to date on his academic freedom campaign: In September 2003, I began a national campaign to persuade universities to adopt an academic bill of rights, aimed at extending traditional academic-freedom protections to students and restoring objectivity and fairness to classrooms. Mounting such an effort is not easy. Getting the issue of campaign finance reform on the national radar, for example, reportedly required some $120-million and the work of several major public-interest organizations. Read More ›

We Is Junk

The quote below is taken from this week’s Nature magazine.

Since joining the blogosphere over two years ago, when challenged, I’ve invoked a scenario pretty much like the one the paper summary is making. I suspect Dave Scot has been making this argument for a longer period than that.

While still preliminary, I have to say that when Nature magazine starts running articles saying that “gene regulation— not the creation of new genes — has moulded the traits that make us unique”, then all that can be said is (a la Allen MacNeil): “Darwinism is dead. Long live evo-devo.” Is the war over?

Anyone who has ever put together self-assembly
furniture knows that having the right parts
is important, but what you do with them can
make or break the project. The same seems
to be true of the vast amounts of DNA in an
organism’s genome that used to be labelled as
junk. Studies now indicate that this DNA may
be responsible for the signals that were crucial
for human evolution, directing the various
components of our genome to work differently
from the way they do in other organisms.

The findings seem to bolster a 30-year-old
hypothesis that gene regulation — not the creation
of new genes — has moulded the traits that
make us unique.

Read More ›

ID in Denmark

Check out the following Danish ID website: www.intelligentdesign.dk. The organizer of this site is also helping to start a Danish Society for Intelligent Design. ID has gotten much media coverage in Denmark over the last year and interest in the topic there is growing.

Denyse O’Leary’s new blog: The Mindful Hack

Check out my new blog on the neuroscience issues that border on the intelligent design controversy, the Mindful Hack: First two stories: 1. Blindness: Spiritual blindness worse than physical? 2. Sigmund Freud … fallen so far and so fast?   Note: The Post-Darwinist will continue as before, and I will continue to contribute to this and all blogs I am not locked out of. Mindful Hack tracks my latest co-authored book, The Spiritual Brain (co-authored with Montreal neuroscientist Mario Beauregard), currently in copy editing.

Biologist muses on why biology is not orderly like physics or chemistry

Dave Miller, who has an MS in biology and is contributing to research on prolidase deficiency in humans, writes us to say:
I have a running debate with a couple of coworkers about how (in their opinion) stupid biological taxonomy is because taxonomists don’t simply choose a species concept and stick with it.
Apparently, his co-workers are not trained biologists (except for undergrad degrees) and complaining about taxonomy does ease their way through a dreary day, no doubt.

Read More ›

Great errors in science: Highlighting the importance of academic freedom

A Brazilian friend advises me that Great Errors in Science , which highlights the importance of academic freedom in the sciences, is available in Portuguese. He explains more at his Portuguese-language blog. Apparently, three articles were written by Brazilian “Ivy league equivalent” professors that my friend has the good fortune to know. My friend, who has a copy, quotes, Science is not only a vital activity for the survival and development of humanity. It is also one of the most beautiful productions of human intelligence. But only the acceptance of its limited character, partial and uncertain can avoid that it transforms itself into a fossilized belief system But that, of course, is precisely what Darwinism has become, complete with ridiculous hagiography. Read More ›

30% of community college professors consider ID science

Praying for an ‘A’ might not impress your prof About 30 percent of community college professors considered intelligent design as a serious scientific alternative. Fewer than 6 percent of professors at elite universities took that position. (HT: my friends at the Discovery Institute for alerting me to the article)

Collected Evolutionary Papers of John A. Davison

1984: Semi-Meiosis as an Evolutionary Mechanism 1993: The Blind Alley 1998: Evolution as a Self-Limiting Process 2000: An Evolutionary Manifesto 2000: Ontogeny, Phylogeny and the Origin of Biological Information 2003: Do We Have an Evolutionary Theory? 2004: Julian Huxley’s Confession 2004: Is Evolution Finished? 2005: A Prescribed Evolutionary Hypothesis 2006: Darwinism as Delusion: A Response to Richard Dawkins

ID goes global: But why should that be a surprise?

The intelligent design controversy has certainly spilled out of its original home among non-materialist Americans.

Here are some useful leads: For Britain, “Infighting among the Darwinists”, Media and Darwinists still ID’s best friends, and the manipulations around what UK PM Tony Blair supposedly said (scroll down). Then there is Quebec (Canada), the Muslim world, and the Catholic Church’s distancing itself from Darwinism. National Center for Science Education also notes the following, no doubt with some overlap with the above.

A recent article in Time made clear that American pundits actually believed that “I.D. lost some of its journalistic heat last December when a federal judge dismissed it as pseudoscience …” (a legal decision in Pennsylvania in 2005).

Just how they could possibly have believed that remains a mystery to me. But I must stop and remind myself that these people probably also believe in, for example, “evolutionary psychology.”  Read More ›

Darwinists are Always Surprised

Here’s a study on E. Coli. They force the bacteria to “mutate” to process glycerol. After six days, sure enough, a kinase shows up to handle the glycerol. But what is a “surprise” is that RNA polymerase shows up besides. It seems that two simultaneous mutations took place. But, of course, this is ONLY a surprise if you think RM+NS brought it about.

The authors say:

Mutations also appeared in a second, unrelated gene for an enzyme called RNA polymerase. “That was a surprise to almost everybody because RNA polymerase is involved in one of the core processes of any cell,” said Palsson. “You wouldn’t expect that gene to change because a wide variety of cellular process would be affected; it’s like replacing the wiring system in a building when a light bulb burns out. But we repeated the experiment more than 50 times and mutations in the RNA polymerase gene appeared again and again.”

I also enjoy the hesitation you almost hear as the reporter has to backtrack somewhat from RM+NS (listen for the word “presumably”):

All the mutants arose in the experiments presumably as the result of naturally occurring errors in copying DNA into daughter cells during cell division.

We here at UD have a better idea about what’s going on.

Here’s the link to the article.
Read More ›

Uncommon Descent is being indexed by Google again

On September 16th, 2006 uncommondescent.com was mysteriously dropped from indexing by google.com. Deindexing means that any google search would never return a hit to uncommondescent.com. We became blogona non grata at google. We were never given a reason beyond we were in violation of webmaster guidelines. Not knowing how, we tried everything we could think of to fix it, including the new WordPress Theme “Cutline”, a sitemap, and shutting down an unauthorized mirror site (antievolution.org/buud). We know that google reevaluated us after all this (it’s in the webmaster report) and we were still not reindexed. The next automatic cycle for evaluations was coming up in December but we had nothing new to try so we held out little hope. Then Read More ›

Peer Review Problem in Nature

The following was brought to my attention as an example of how a lot of bad science passes the so-called peer review process at well respected publications like Nature. It’s specifically about pencil-whipped temperature data in global warming but is more broadly about a flawed peer review process in general. Especially flawed when the paper under review is supportive of consensus science like Global Warming or Neo-Darwinian Evolution. Can you say “rubber stamp”? FLAWED NATURE PAPER ON GLOBAL WARMING Douglas J. Keenan, November 2006