CALIFORNIA ACADEMY OF SCIENCES SETTLES LIBEL CLAIM OVER EVOLUTION ARTICLE Parent’s Claim Sparked by False Article by Leading Darwin Advocate ROSEVILLE, CA — The California Academy of Sciences has settled with a California parent, Larry Caldwell, who raised a potential libel claim against the organization over its publication of a false and defamatory article authored […]
Maybe, just maybe, ID is a meme that is far better adapted than evolution for the irrational, haphazardly evolved non-specified complex environment that constitutes the human mind.
Laurie Lebo of the York Daily Record interviewed me about being dropped as an expert witness in the Dover ID case (go here for the story). The Thomas More Law Center, a public interest law firm which had hired me as an expert witness, did not want the Foundation for Thought and Ethics, which publishes […]
Professor Ruse’s new book suggests that the religious resistance to evolutionary theory is a lot more understandable and a lot less unreasonable than its opponents recognize.
Del Ratzsch as an extended critical review of Niall Shanks’s anti-ID book God, the Devil, and Darwin. The review is at Ars Disputandi — go here.
A few days ago, I posted an old cartoon by Wayne Stayskal (“The Literal Interpretation of Darwin” — go here). I updated the cartoon slightly by substituting the phrase “intelligent design” for “creation.” Stayskal drew the cartoon back in 1981 at the time of the Arkansas creation trial. Here’s another one of my favorite Stayskal […]
Check out the following item: http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/science/20050608-9999-lz1c08intel.html. Have any of these respondents read any of the ID literature?
Here’s a blurb from the June issue of Advances, the AAAS monthly newsletter:
Here’s an update from IDURC’s director:
Robert Schuller’s Crystal Cathedral is doing a multimillion-dollar multimedia production trying to reconcile science and religion. Check out this report: http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/features/20050616-9999-lz1c16crystal.html.
Del Ratzsch’s entry on “Teleological Arguments for God’s Existence” is now available online in the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy at http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/teleological-arguments and includes some remarks about ID. Del is simultaneously a critic and supporter of ID. His book Nature, Design, and Science (SUNY Press, 2001) is worth reading.
There’s an interesting exchange tucked away in some comments at the Pandasthumb on what it would take to provide an evolutionary explanation of the bacterial flagellum:
To say that evolution is “a theory which has created cures for diseases and alleviated suffering” is therefore grossly misleading. It is like saying that tooth decay has assisted in designing new methods of filling cavities.
I think their listeners would be rather stunned to hear you or Behe or similar not remotely sounding like anti-scientific biblical creationists, which is the current stereotype they have of you and the ID movement