On May 21st, I wrote an item on this blog titled “Sorry, kids, but you’re just too stupid” (go here), which described one rationale by Darwinists to exclude the teaching of intelligent design in the public schools, namely, kids are too stupid to understand the issues raised by evolutionary theory so that bringing up intelligent Read More…
My good friend and colleague Jeffrey Schwartz (along with Mario Beauregard and Henry Stapp) has just published a paper in the Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society that challenges the materialism endemic to so much of contemporary neuroscience. By contrast, it argues for the irreducibility of mind (and therefore intelligence) to material mechanisms.
My alumni/ae magazine, The University of Chicago Magazine, has a brief piece on me in its June 2005 issue (p. 58). It’s always interesting to see how one is perceived:
Although it may be morally offensive to consider that we may be some ET High School science project gone awry, it would explain a lot. . . . So count us among those who hold that the idea of “intelligent design” should be included in the scholastic curriculum — but without any prejudicial mention of Read More…
Discovery Institute Files Public Records Request in OSU Evolution Academic Freedom Case SEATTLE Ã¢â‚¬â€œ Discovery Institute has filed a public records request with the Ohio State University (OSU) seeking all documents related to Darwinist attacks on OSU doctoral candidate Bryan Leonard. The request was submitted under the Ohio Public Records Act.
media coverage of intelligent design has mostly failed to present your case on scientific grounds
Leading Cardinal Redefines Church’s View on Evolution By CORNELIA DEAN and LAURIE GOODSTEIN
Check out the following article in The Scientist:
In replying to my blog entry of June 23, 2005 (go here for my entry and here for Shallit’s response), Jeffrey Shallit has succumbed to the endearing weakness of revising history in his own favor. I’ll respond to him point for point:
Cardinal SchÃƒÂ¶nborn’s oped today in the NYTimes is one of the first signs that the Catholic Church under Pope Benedict XVI is going to be repudiating neo-Darwinism and supporting ID. SchÃƒÂ¶nborn is both a close personal friend of the pope and philosophically on the same page with him. See also Mike Behe’s comments about this Read More…
The New Republic asked the opinions of prominent conservatives on evolution and ID.
Jewish mathematician David Berlinski, a well-known critic of Darwinism, told Christianity Today, “I thought the uproar was indecent. I am in general appalled but not surprised by the willingness of academics to give up every principle of free speech and honest debate whenever they think they can do so without paying a price.” MORE
Massimo Pigliucci, in the past one of my more extreme critics (e.g., go here and here), is now trying to put a softer face on his skepticism and atheism. He admits that on three matters relevant to the ID debate, he has changed his mind. I’ll leave it to you to decide if these changes Read More…
It must be true — I read it in the New York Times: http://www.nytimes.com/2005/07/05/science/05essa.html?
Earlier on this blog, DaveScot cited Michael Shermer’s account of the Word Summit on Evolution that took place in the Galapagos Islands last month (go here for Shermer’s account in the Scientific American). TomG then raised the following question (for the thread in which he did so, go here):