[William Tucker writes:] I havenÃ¢â‚¬â„¢t seen the movie, but I did read the excerpt from the book, The Privileged Planet, in the March 2004 issue of The American Spectator. I donÃ¢â‚¬â„¢t know whether IÃ¢â‚¬â„¢d call authors Guillermo Gonzalez and Jay RichardsÃ¢â‚¬â„¢ argument Ã¢â‚¬Å“religious.Ã¢â‚¬Â Ã¢â‚¬Å“CreepyÃ¢â‚¬Â would seem a better term. MORE
evolutionists, in their thirst to crush ID, are every bit as committed to political maneuvering the most ardent supporter of the “Wedge.”
The Scientific Contrarian By George Scialabba a frequent contributor to Book World, the Boston Globe and other publications Washington Post, Thursday, June 2, 2005; Page C03
James Pinkerton offers a transhumanist critique of ID at Tech Central Station titled “The Real Intelligent Designers.” Transhumanists believe in enhancing the human person through technology (for some the goal is to upload the human to a more efficient technology, thereby dispensing entirely with our current wetware).
George Ellis, physicist and Templeton Prize winner, in today’s Nature has an interesting short article titled “Physics, Complexity, and Causality.” In it he remarks that the physical sciences offer no insight into “intentional design.” The article itself includes the following image and caption: The question you need to be asking yourself is why is Nature […]
Evolutionist row makes museum ditch donation Geoff Brumfiel, Washington DC Nature 435, 725 (9 June 2005) But intelligent-design group will show movie on Smithsonian premises…
I’ve been out of pocket a few days to attend the deposition of Barbara Forrest in the Dover County ID Case (I’m an expert witness for the ID side and was advising the ID side’s deposing attorney; by the way, Forrest struck me as very nice in person). I expect I’ll be reporting more on […]
So asking for a detailed, testable Darwinian pathway to show that evolution occurs is now a perverse evidential demand. Yes, you heard right.
Dekker … hopes the debate will get more serious after the impending publication of a collection of 22 essays about ID and related themes, most of them by Dutch scientists, which he has co-edited.
Imagine such blogs appearing at one university after another. Now imagine a Darwinist’s worst nightmare. But I repeat myself.
Just so there’s no doubt regarding the following story, to say that the provost was replaced is to say that he was fired. What does this portend for Baylor? The signs are not good if the aim is to see Baylor become a university that is Christian in more than just name. Sloan and Jeffrey […]
Smithsonian Distances Itself From Controversial Film http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/06/01/AR2005060101986.html By Tommy Nguyen Washington Post Staff Writer Thursday, June 2, 2005; Page C01 The controversy over the Smithsonian Museum of Natural History’s decision to allow a documentary based on “intelligent design” — the theory that life is so meticulously complex that a divine intelligence must have designed it […]
Proteins change single mutation by single mutation, amino acid by amino acid, so thatÃ¢â‚¬â„¢s the level of explanation that is needed. What part of Ã¢â‚¬Å“numerous, successive, slightÃ¢â‚¬Â is so hard to understand?
If (as Orr claims) I.D. Ã¢â‚¬Å“looks less and less like the science it claimed to be and more and more like an extended exercise in polemics,Ã¢â‚¬Â isnÃ¢â‚¬â„¢t it strange that it has recently convinced the foremost secular philosopher in England (Antony Flew) to give up his atheism?
A good Darwinist will imagine 2 or 3 far-fetched intermediate useful stages, and consider the problem solved. I believe you would need to find thousands of intermediate stages before this example of irreducible complexity has been reduced to steps small enough to be bridged by single random mutations