science education
Why Darwinism can be taught in schools but not ID
L&FP, 55: Defining/Clarifying Intelligent Design as Inference, as Theory, as a Movement
It seems, despite UD’s resources tab, some still struggle to understand ID in the three distinct senses: inference, theory/research programme, movement. Accordingly, let us headline a clarifying note from the current thread on people who doubt, for the record: [KF, 269:] >>. . . first we must mark out a matter of inductive reasoning and epistemology. Observed tested, reliable signs such as FSCO/I [= functionally specific, complex organisation and/or associated information, “fun-skee”] beyond 500 – 1,000 bits point to design as cause for cases we have not observed. This is the design INFERENCE. Note, inference, not movement, not theory. Following the UD Weak Argument Correctives under the Resources tab, we can identify ID Theory as a [small] research programme that Read More ›
Palmer Study Course On Intelligent Design: Review and Conclusion
The Khan Academy markets 1980s Darwinism
But Wasn’t Eugenie Scott PAID to Confuse People?
A good idea: Teach philosophy of science in high school
Jerry Coyne on the war on math, science, in New Zealand – and falling scores
Was Thomas Henry Huxley the first science journalist?
Video Presentation: Why the Debate Over Intelligent Design Really Matters
I have recently posted a new video presentation on my YouTube channel. In the video I talk about some of the reasons why I think the debate over Intelligent Design and biological origins is of great significance. Aside from just being a fascinating area, it has many implications in several areas of life. This video, while far from perfect, is a big step up from my last few videos. I’ve done a fair amount of editing on this one, and took time to make it a little more professional, with music, slides, and photos. I hope you enjoy it, and it gets you thinking a little about why this topic is of importance to you also. Why the Question of Read More ›