Intelligent Design

A more honest appraisal can be had from Douglas Allchin at Minnesota Center for the Philosophy of Science: Abstract: In standard characterizations, science is self-correcting. Scientists examine each other’s work skeptically, try to replicate important discoveries, and thereby expose latent errors. Thus, while science is tentative, it also seems to have a system for correcting whatever mistakes arise. It powerfully explains and justifies the authority of science. Self-correction thus often serves emblematically in promoting science as a superior form of knowledge. But errors can and do occur. Some errors remain uncorrected for long periods. I present five sets of historical observations that indicate a need to rethink the widespread mythos of self-correction. First, some errors persist for decades, wholly undetected. Second, Read More ›

Are they growing up over there? From Anil Ananthaswamy at New Scientist: But what is this information? Is it “ontological” – a real thing from which space, time and matter emerge, just as an atom emerges from fundamental particles such as electrons and quarks and gluons? Or is it “epistemic” – something that just represents our state of knowledge about reality? Here opinions are divided. Cosmologist Paul Davies argues in the book Information and the Nature of Reality that information “occupies the ontological basement”. In other words, it is not about something, it is itself something. Sean Carroll at the California Institute of Technology in Pasadena disagrees. Even if all of reality emerges from information, he says, this information is Read More ›

From Anna Buckley at BBC: Consciousness is real. Of course it is. We experience it every day. But for Daniel Dennett, consciousness is no more real than the screen on your laptop or your phone. The geeks who make electronic devices call what we see on our screens the “user illusion”. It’s a bit patronising, perhaps, but they’ve got a point. … Our brains, like our bodies, have evolved over hundreds of millions of years. They are the result of millions and millions of years of haphazard trial and error evolutionary experiments. From an evolutionary perspective, our ability to think is no different from our ability to digest, says Dennett. Both these biological activities can be explained by Darwin’s Theory Read More ›

Dark energy might be an illusion say some researchers. From Adrian Cho at Science: For the past 20 years, physicists have known that the expansion of the universe is accelerating, as if some bizarre “dark energy” is blowing up space like a balloon. In fact, cosmologists’ well-tested standard model assumes that 69% of the content of the universe is dark energy. However, there may be no need for the mysterious stuff, a team of theorists claims. Instead, the researchers argue, the universe’s acceleration could be driven by variations, or inhomogeneities, in its density. If so, then one of the biggest mysteries in physics could be explained away with nothing other than Albert Einstein’s familiar general theory of relativity. Other researchers Read More ›

That is, if you write a realistic evolutionary simulation, instead of a simplistic one. From Kirk Durston at Contemplations: A Response to Matlock and Swamidass on the Astonishing Improbability of Protein Families … In their simulation, they began with a perfectly ordered repeating sequence and then mutate it to see if the estimated functional information for non-functional sequences would converge on the actual value of zero bits of information. It did not, producing estimates that were significantly in error from the known value of zero bits. They provided no analysis as to why their results were so badly off. I wrote a more realistic simulation that began with the same, highly ordered repeating sequence. From that seed sequence the program Read More ›

… apologists are trying to explain why it is not an alternative to God. From Jeff Miller at Apologetics Press: 7 Reasons the Multiverse Is Not a Valid Alternative to God [Part 1] Joshua Sokol, writing in New Scientist, said concerning “neighbouring universe[s] leaking into ours,” “Sadly, if they do exist, other bubbles are nigh on impossible to learn about.”56 Amanda Gefter, also writing in New Scientist, discussed making predictions and testing them through observations in the Universe.“That’s not possible in an infinite multiverse: there are no definite predictions, only probabilities.”57 Clark and Webb discuss various difficulties with the idea that there are many Universes: “The second is how you get convincing evidence for the existence of any of them.”58 Read More ›

From Catherine Rudder at PNAS: Opinion: Let’s march to stress the value of science for the public good, not to engage in partisan politics If the March for Science were meant as a partisan enterprise or an objection to President Trump’s policies in general, scientists would have reason to be reluctant to participate. In their statement of purpose, the organizers issue a “call to support and safeguard the scientific community” (https://www.marchforscience.com), a somewhat nebulous phrase that could be interpreted in a variety of ways. The statement goes on to lament the “mischaracterization of science as a partisan issue, which has given policymakers permission to reject overwhelming evidence” (https://www.marchforscience.com). In other words, the event is meant to underscore that scientific findings Read More ›

Readers will, of course, remember Bill Nye, volunteer jailer of dissidents and sometime debating partner of Answers in Genesis’ Ken Ham. Now, from Azeen Gorayshi at Buzzfeed: Since the march’s inception at the end of January, critics have repeatedly slammed the organizers for saying that the march should be about championing science, not mixing it up with politics. So when it came to choosing public faces for the march, the organizers were struggling to figure out how not to screw up again. “I love Bill Nye,” said Stephani Page, a biophysicist at University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, who created the Twitter hashtag #BlackAndSTEM. Page was asked to join the march’s board in February after she tweeted criticism of its Read More ›

Maybe not. From ScienceDaily: Dr. Jordan Mallon, a dinosaur specialist at the museum, argues instead that the fossil evidence for these distinctions is inconclusive and, as a result, it might be time to “rewrite the textbooks.” His report, published today in the online journal Paleobiology, focusses on the biological principle of sexual dimorphism, where males and females of a species can be distinguished based on physical characteristics other than sexual organs. “I’m not saying that dinosaurs were not dimorphic, but I am saying that there’s no existing fossil evidence to suggest that they were. The jury is still out,” says Mallon. Mallon made his assessment by revisiting previous studies attributing sexual dimorphism to dinosaurs. The problem, he explains, is that Read More ›

The way thing are going, they might even succeed. From Rod Dreher at American Conservative: Having all but ruined humanities education, the Social Justice Warriors now turn to the STEM fields. Purdue University has hired Donna Riley as its new head of its School of Engineering Education. Here’s an excerpt from Prof. Riley’s biography page at Smith College, where she taught for 13 years: My scholarship currently focuses on applying liberative pedagogies in engineering education, leveraging best practices from women’s studies and ethnic studies to engage students in creating a democratic classroom that encourages all voices. In 2005 I received a CAREER award from the National Science Foundation to support this work, which includes developing, implementing, and assessing curricular and Read More ›

Here’s Richard Webb interviewing Peter (“Higgs boson”) Higgs on the occasion of his receiving the “1851 Royal Commission medal for outstanding influence on science” at New Scientist: What would your advice be to someone who has your sort of esoteric interests? Go undercover. I wasn’t productive in an obvious way; I didn’t churn out papers. I think these days the University of Edinburgh would have sacked me long ago, there’s just too much competition. So now I would say, do it in your spare time, and get yourself a solid publication record in the sort of thing that gets you recognition more readily. More. Higgs has noted this before: Higgs boson discoverer wouldn’t get a job today? “He doubts a similar breakthrough Read More ›

… talking about ID. From Zondervan Academic: We are now just several weeks away from the release of the Dictionary of Christianity and Science. We have been encouraged by the response so far—it has occupied the #1 New Release spot on Amazon in the category of Christian Bible Dictionaries & Encyclopedias for much of the past few months. More. Look for entries from Bill Dembski, Steve Meyer, Ann Gauger, Bruce Gordon, Michael Flannery, Mike Keas, Paul Nelson, Wayne Rossiter, Angus Menuge, Guillermo Gonzalez, Michael Egnor, Cornelius Hunter, Rob Sheldon, Jonathan McLatchie, etc. Just think: Apparently, it is actually a reference work. It can tell you what is happening in these areas in newsmakers’ own words. At US$59.99, it is a Read More ›

In Pittsburgh, including 12:00 PM Nik Melchior. “Machine Emulation of Human Thought” Artificial intelligence promises the development of computers with the same capabilities of cognition, perception, and problem-solving as their human inventors. Recent applications include self-driving cars, robots that work in factories, and computers able to best humans in games like Jeopardy, Chess, and Go. This talk will present an accessible introduction to common techniques and paradigms in the study of artificial intelligence and machine learning. The significance of newsworthy AI systems will be examined, as well as the perceived threat of superhuman intelligence that does not share our morality. Bio: Nik Melchior received his masters in computer science from Washington University in St. Louis and his Ph.D. in robotics Read More ›

From Mike Macrae at ScienceAlert: New Simulations Suggest Dark Energy Might Not Exist 68 percent of the Universe might not exist. Physicists from Loránd University in Hungary and the Institute for Astronomy at the University of Hawaii are now questioning if approximations in Einstein’s equations introduced “serious side effects” that gave the illusion of a vast, unknown force pushing space apart. … The thing is, right now it’s little more than an empty box without any other properties to describe the nature of its existence. More. Empty box? That’s what the hamburger poll in the lunchroom here said too. Apart from that, we can’t keep up. Is it possible that the sheer ability to make up theories without consequence is Read More ›

From Sally Adee at New Scientist: For people like Cerf and many American companies, who view online speech through the lens of the US First Amendment, Germany’s approach may look like a heavy-handed suppression of the right of free expression. However, it may be a necessary first step in re-establishing a shared moral reality. In the age of bots, misinformation, and anonymity, free speech itself may be used to enact a kind of censorship. … There are many good reasons to be wary of outsourcing the policing of moral beliefs to private corporations, even if they are only tasked with implementing a country’s national laws, as would be the case with the draft German proposal. But we should focus on Read More ›