Science
“- ome, sweet “-ome,” in science usage
John Gray: “Scientism has been shown to be an illusion time and time again”
Sorting science from speculation: Handy guides available
Assessing Thomas Kuhn’s legacy: “It’s not so clear that there will be any more revolutions in physics”
He said it: Newton in Principia, on rules of reasoning for experimental philosophy
The ongoing debates over methodological naturalism have pointed us back to Newton’s Rules for scientific reasoning. So, thanks to Paul Halshall of Fordham University’s Modern History Sourcebook, let us cite for reference: ___________________ >> Modern History Sourcebook: Isaac Newton: The Mathematical Principles of Natural Philosophy [Excerpts] [The Rules of Reasoning in Philosophy] RULE I We are to admit no more causes of natural things, than such as are both true and sufficient to explain their appearances. To this purpose the philosophers say, that Nature does nothing in vain, and more is in vain, when less will serve; for Nature is pleased with simplicity, and affects not the pomp of superfluous causes. RULE II Therefore to the same natural effects we Read More ›
Can a paradigm in science be true?
Genetic meltdown causes adaptations? Journal paper doesn’t support it, merely states it
James Lovelock: A self-confessed climate “alarmist” changes his mind
James Lovelock, father of Gaia theory and previous forecaster of humanity’s doom by global warming, now says he was an alarmist who extrapolated too far in making his predictions. More after the click.
“Magnifying the Universe” — Fantastic Infographic
Here’s a fantastic infographic that needs to be in every science classroom. I’ve seen similar ones, but this is by far the best: The Universe made possible by Number Sleuth Be sure to look at this in full screen mode. Whether you love or hate ID, you’ve got to admit that this is one beautiful universe! Link: www.numbersleuth.org/universe
Bayesian thinking – and trusting one’s gut
Yes, a Catholic can be a young Earth creationist in good faith
“It’s Friday, but Sunday’s coming!” — Nobel Prize holder Charles Townes on design thought and anti-evolutionism, in light of Michael Shermer in Sci Am on “the standard scientific theory” of evolution
What on earth does the title of a famous Good Friday Sermon have to do with the ID controversy? (Even, come Easter Sunday morning . . . ) A lot. Sadly. As I was reading and thinking about Dr Torley’s latest amazing UD series and some of UD’s ever so fascinating comments [one of the best features of UD is comments], I was led to look at the Dr Townes story, and related matters. One of the findings is how Dr Townes, a Nobel Prize holder for physics, turns out to be a cosmological design thinker who actually supports intelligent design in an evolutionary framework [i.e. pretty similar to Wallace, co-founder of modern evolutionary theory], but sees ID as anti-evolutionism. Read More ›