Intelligent Design

on this page, for Eugene V. Koonin’s forthcoming book, The Logic of Chance: The Nature and Origin of Biological Evolution (FT Press, 2011), and see what turns up. From Overview: The book examines a broad range of topics in evolutionary biology including the inadequacy of natural selection and adaptation as the only or even the main mode of evolution; the key role of horizontal gene transfer in evolution and the consequent overhaul of the Tree of Life concept; the central, underappreciated evolutionary importance of viruses; the origin of eukaryotes as a result of endosymbiosis; the concomitant origin of cells and viruses on the primordial earth; universal dependences between genomic and molecular-phenomic variables; and the evolving landscape of constraints that shape Read More ›

Starting here, Evolution News & Views offers a 10 part series, rebutting Darwin’s man PZ “I should have been ruder” Myers – the sage of  Morris, Minnesota, on evolution and embryology. The series featuring Jonathan McLatchie and Casey Luskin, withstanding the cloud of insults and obscenities, on behalf of reason, logic, and evidence. Myers beautifully embodies Darwinism in full flower. If humans are merely primates, then obscene and irrational bluster is merely science. What part of that do some people not understand? Follow UD News at Twitter!

For many of us, an important characteristic of science is self-correction. We are proud of the way new findings catalyse re-evaluation and, if corrections are needed, the development of new knowledge. If you are like this, be prepared to be shocked when you read Jonathan Wells’ latest book. The concept of Junk DNA was widely held by evolutionary biologists during the 1990s, but only a few were prepared to expose the hypothesis to tests of its validity. Yet this is when publications started to accumulate that reported functionality in genetic material widely regarded as “nonsense”. Instead of alerting popularisers of science to be cautious, these writers treated the new data as unrepresentative exceptions. They pressed on with their claim that Read More ›

Starting in 1973, Herbert Terrace led an ambitious project to examine the capability of chimps to develop sign language. The chimp participant was born at the Institute for Primate Studies in Oklahoma and was taken from his mother after about a week and handed to Stephanie LaFarge who acted as a surrogate parent. The chimp was effectively adopted. In a recent piece in Nature, Terrace explains why he initiated the project: “After serving as a graduate assistant at Harvard University with behavioural psychologist B. F. Skinner, I heard that Allen and Beatrix Gardner at the University of Nevada, Reno, were teaching sign language to a chimpanzee named Washoe. But when I looked at their data, I wasn’t sure that the Read More ›

Here. Oh goodness, Church is okay!

Except for the fact that Jerry Why Evolution Is True Coyne is mad at him. Can the man hope to live under those circumstances?

Church said in response to a question, Is there evidence of God in science?

Some people feel that science and faith have nothing in common. But a considerable amount of faith drives everyday science — and frequently religion addresses scientific topics (e.g. the physics/biology of miracles, ancient gods, Galileo). If faith had no impact on our physical brain, then by what mechanisms does it impact our spoken conversations. Billions of humans (in a very real scientific sense) have faith. The overlap is vast and fertile. As we learn more about nature, for many of us, this greatly strengthens rather than lessens our awe.

From Coyne: Read More ›

From ScienceDaily, we learn: “Enzymes for Cell Wall Synthesis Conserved Across Species Barriers” (July 14, 2011):

Due to its short lifecycle and biological simplicity, Arabidopsis is extremely useful for research, but lacks economic potential. Persson and his colleagues would therefore like to apply the knowledge gained from the research on this plant to other more economically important plant species. Read More ›

An insect every gardener hates, the female scale insect carries her own sperm—harbored in tissue passed down through the generations—so she doesn’t need a male to have her babies. – Natalie Villacorta, “ScienceShot: Sex and the Single Insect,” Science, 15 July 2011 Scientists differ as to whether this is a good strategy, but a recent finding is that males may be going extinct as a result. If so, there is no more recruitment for the gene pool, in which case …

Over on his Evolution Blog, Professor Jason Rosenhouse has written a post (which has been highly praised by Professor Jerry Coyne) entitled, Where can I find the really good theology? Part one. Apparently he really believes there isn’t any to be found:

We New Atheist types are often lectured about the need for studying theology. The idea is that if we tuned out the distressingly popular and highly vocal forms of religious extremism and pondered instead “the best religion has to offer,” then we would not be so hostile to religion.

…I have read a fair amount of highbrow theology. I have read my share of Augustine and Aquinas, Barth and Tillich, Kierkegaard and Kuhn, just to pick a few names. I have read quite a lot of Haught and Ward and Swinburne. I did not go into this expecting to be disappointed. Conversion seemed unlikely, but I expected at least to find a lot of food for thought. Instead, with each book and essay I read I found myself ever more horrified by the sheer vacuity of what these folks were doing. I came to despise their endlessly vague and convoluted arguments, their relentless smugness towards nonbelievers, and, most seriously, the complete lack of any solid reason for thinking they weren’t just making it up as they went along. I thought perhaps I was just reading the wrong writers, and that I would eventually come to the really good theology. But I never did.

Well, Professor Rosenhouse, I’ve been reading theology for over three decades myself, and I’ve compiled a collection of the “best of the best”: a dozen or so online articles which, when taken together, constitute a very strong philosophical case for belief in God. Read More ›

Here (7/15/2011).

For nearly a decade Democrats have sought a religious wedge issue that could separate big chunks of white evangelical voters from their Republican home. Now they’ve found it, and are thrusting at the Social Darwinist/Ayn Rand underbelly of American conservatism.

Read More ›

In my previous post I discussed a paper published in the leading journal Nature on protein evolution. In spite of the scientific evidence showing the evolution of proteins is unlikely, this paper is used as an apologetic by evolutionists for why said evolution is actually no big problem. The paper uses a somewhat circuitous method to arrive at its conclusion that protein evolution occurs early and often and that the findings are yet more “novel evidence of the common ancestry of life.” These conclusions are false and are based on a naïve and circular analysis. This is not easy to understand, however, because the analysis is circuitous. Here I will provide a simple explanation to help illustrate the fallacy.  Read Read More ›

For many of us, an important characteristic of science is self-correction. We are proud of the way new findings catalyse re-evaluation and, if corrections are needed, the development of new knowledge. If you are like this, be prepared to be shocked when you read Jonathan Wells’ latest book. The concept of Junk DNA was widely held by evolutionary biologists during the 1990s, but only a few were prepared to expose the hypothesis to tests of its validity. Yet this is when publications started to accumulate that reported functionality in genetic material widely regarded as “nonsense”. Instead of alerting popularisers of science to be cautious, these writers treated the new data as unrepresentative exceptions. They pressed on with their claim that Read More ›