Uncommon Descent Serving The Intelligent Design Community
Category

Media

An eye-opening science-related COVID roundup

Reliance on expertise can, depending on the circumstances, be a form of superstition. And, in short, the numbers solemnly announced by the suits on TV are often just a crock. And none of this is doing the reputation of science any good. Read More ›

Sabine Hossenfelder makes it to Slashdot

Hossenfelder: What we have here in the foundation of physics is a plain failure of the scientific method. All these wrong predictions should have taught physicists that just because they can write down equations for something does not mean this math is a scientifically promising hypothesis. Read More ›

New Scientist tries to undermine Cambrian explosion

The Ediacaran creatures are fascinating predecessors to be sure. They will likely turn out to be explosions of life, just like the Cambrian, but often not clearly related to it. Read More ›

The science-based arguments against Copernicus and Galileo

Pop science writing typically misleads us by portraying the conflict as if the rightness of the Copernican universe were self-evident. For sure not at the time. Read More ›

At the Atlantic: Textbook evolution story is said to be WRONG

Hadn’t the Darwin lobby better invade and frogmarch all these little East Coast snots back into line? They must never talk in such a way as to imply that Darwinism could be wrong about anything. Read More ›

PragerU’s new vid explains science-based doubts about evolution

"In November 2016, I attended a conference in London attended by some of the world’s leading evolutionary biologists. The purpose? To address growing doubts about the modern version of Darwin’s theory," Read More ›

Rob Sheldon on the end of the internet Golden Age

The questions raised by a recent Analysis feature at Mind Matters News, by a long-time tech maven, affect everyone who gets most of their information from the internet. Sheldon responds: If you are a millennial, or a parent/friend to a millennial, this article captures the depression/frustration of millennials perfectly. Read More ›

How “single-study stories” build up science’s Neverland

A longstanding problem is that science writers tend to act as cheerleaders instead of constructive critics. Most of the probing questions that could have been asked about many hyped claims do not require advanced degrees, just a tendency to compare different teams’ findings and ask the tough questions. Read More ›

What? David Berlinski and Gunter Bechly reply to Jerry Coyne … at Quillette?

It would be fun to discuss the history of life for once without the dead hand of Darwin overruling all. From the looks of things, it may also be possible now. Read More ›

The growth of the Internet, 1990 – 2019

Of general interest — and especially observe the rise of China, India and Nigeria: Food for thought. END PS: Jawa points to some interesting points of data with images worth highlighting. First, number of sites (where approx. 200 mn are regularly active): Likewise, it is noted by tekeye that “[d]espite there being over 1.5 billion websites only a few hundred dominate the Internet. Less than 1 million, or 0.1%, account for over 50% of web traffic. To get an idea on how much such a small percentage of the total websites dominate look at The Internet Map.”

Today is 9-11-01 + 18 years, let us remember

We owe a debt of honour to remember. So, in absence of the full 9 -hour CNN feed that seems to no longer be there, first NBC live: Here is a timeline: Let us remember, and let us remember that September 11, 2001 was the 318th anniversary of the lifting of the last, 1683 Ottoman siege of Vienna by Jan Sobieski of Poland and Lithuania, less one day. I add, the Jan Sobieski story: Yes, Osama bin Laden was making a claim to pick up from the previous high water mark of Islamist expansion to the West. And, he did that from a place that relative to Mecca is in the direction of Khorasan, which is of deep eschatological significance Read More ›

“Skeptical Inquirer” calls National Geographic book a “natural disaster”

The main thing to see here is that the book is published by National Geographic, once a source you would not have expected to be backing this stuff. The real war on science is not doubts about Darwin. To the extent that so many people have allowed Darwinists to snooker them into believing that, they likely don’t know what to do now that seriously fact-challenged points of view can parade as virtue. Read More ›