Question: should the following statement get a science professor ousted from teaching?

the presence of a creative deity in the universe is clearly a scientific hypothesis. Indeed, it is hard to imagine a more momentous hypothesis in all of science.

Richard Dawkins

And for exploring aspects of this most momentous hypothesis in all of science, Dr. Crocker was removed from teaching at George Mason.

As reported by Casey Luskin at www.EvolutionNews.org

there are cases documenting genuine discrimination against scientists who support intelligent design (ID). One of those incidents took place at George Mason University (GMU), where Caroline Crocker was ousted from teaching biology because she challenged to neo-Darwinian evolution and favorably mentioned ID in the classroom. Dr. Crocker later appeared in Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed, but now many more details about Caroline Crocker’s story are revealed in her new autobiographical book, Free to Think: Why Scientific Integrity Matters.
Read More ›

‘Non-coding’ pieces of RNA can encode short proteins that regulate genes, researchers have found. Various non-coding RNA molecules do not produce protein but either regulate gene expression or carry out other functions in the cell. Many researchers question whether the rest of the apparently non-coding RNA made in cells has any function. Some believe many RNA molecules in the cell are merely junk — the accidental by-products of the process that transcribes RNA from a DNA template. “We missed microRNA for decades — maybe we missed ‘micropeptides’ for even longer.” Researchers in Japan have found a ‘non-coding’ RNA that directly codes for four peptides, short chains of amino acids from 11 to 32 amino acids long, that act to regulate Read More ›

It is well known that orb-weaving spiders put droplets of adhesive all over their webs to catch prey. Although there have been many attempts to study the nature of these adhesives, it is only recently that experiment designs have allowed the mechanism of adhesion to be analysed properly. Single adhesive droplets have been probed at varying extension rates. “Here, by directly probing single adhesive droplets used by spiders, we demonstrate the importance of the mechanics of adhesive in dramatically enhancing adhesion. We show that glue drops function as a viscoelastic material instead of as a viscous material and that the elasticity of the principle adhesive in this system, the glycoproteins, increases adhesion by two orders of magnitude in comparison with Read More ›

The Spanish Paseos Por La Naturaleza (A Walk Through Nature) series continues with a review of Biologic Institute researcher Douglas Axe’s thesis on the probabilistic barriers that make a neo-Darwinian explanation for the origin of protein folds untenable.  Given his scientific background, Axe is well qualified to argue against the undirected origin of protein structure and convincingly counters those who extravagate over the much-heralded modular transfer of folds between proteins. The Paseos Por La Naturaleza series aims to further strengthen the global influence that the Intelligent Design movement already enjoys and raise awareness of important academic resources that are today challenging orthodox Darwinism and revitalizing the call for a fresh perspective on scientific discourse. The fifth installment can be found at: Como Read More ›

A recent Oxford conference has celebrated the long service to science and religion by John Polkinghorne. This Guardian ‘Comment is Free’ blog post by Mark Vernon is of interest because it discusses Polkinghorne’s belief about causal gaps with top down intentional causality. Chaos Theory Polkinghorne and God Vernon comments that “it’s not an epistemological gap that’s being appealed to in John Polkinghorne’s work, but rather an ontological causal openness. Hence the possibility, at least, of making the link with divine action.” Science and Values

A child once informed his friends his toy bulldozer could dig all the way through the Earth. But wasn’t the Earth too big? No, look at the Grand Canyon—it is proof of what such small shovels can do. Such childish logic, amazingly, shows up repeatedly in evolutionary “theory.” It is a treasure trove of bizarre and silly claims and justifications which rises to the surface, as with the child’s reasoning, when the evolutionist is questioned about his convictions. Consider, for example, the oft heard evolutionary mechanism of random mutation followed by natural selection which, like the toy bulldozer, apparently can do just about anything. When queried about this most amazing idea, the underlying evolutionary logic is revealed.  Read more

One of reasons evolutionists find their theory to be so compelling is the so-called “shared error” evidence. Designs that are shared between species are evidence for evolution, but junk that is shared between species are veritable proofs for evolution. This evolutionary interpretation of shared junk is yet another example the religious foundation of evolutionary thought. We might say it is another example of evolution’s junk religion.  Read more

At Scientific American John Horgan has provided a helpful reminder of Karl Popper’s skepticism of evolutionary theory and why it doesn’t matter. The great philosopher found evolution to be “almost a tautology” and “not a testable scientific theory but a metaphysical research program.” He was browbeaten by evolutionists into a forced retraction but in fact he remained a skeptic as evidenced when Horgan interviewed him in 1992. “One ought to look for alternatives!” Popper exclaimed to Horgan, banging his kitchen table.  Read more

Check out this video game called CellCraft: www.kongregate.com/games/CellCraft/cellcraft This will do much to get people to see the irreducible complexity inside a cell and the obstacle it poses to conventional evolutionary theory.

A friend directed me to this fun little article from the Jewish World Review. I’m not a regular reader of JWR, so missed this wonderful little piece from Paul Greenberg, in which he recalls the Sokal Hoax of 1996. For those not familiar with it, the Sokal Hoax was an article written by Professor Alan Sokal, a professor of Physics at New York University and submitted to a not too widely followed academic journal called Social Text as part of a series on Science wars. The article was entitled Transgressing the Boundaries: Towards a Transformative Hermeneutics of Quantum Gravity,( Social Text, Spring/Summer 1996), and was, according to Greenberg, Read More ›

Discovery has produced a nice promo video for my book In the Beginning and Other Essays on Intelligent Design. The video is of course not designed to make a serious argument for ID, but just to pique the viewer’s interest enough to consider buying the book, and that is of course my reason for posting it here. If you want to discuss the point made in the video, I hope you will first read the Postscript to my 1985 Springer-Verlag book (now Chapter 4 in the new book), where the point is made in more detail, or my 2000 Mathematical Intelligencer article which is now Chapter 3. Actually, the similarities between the development of software and the development of life Read More ›

The Understanding Evolution for Teachers website makes the usual claim that evolution is a fact, but because that is undefendable it is first careful to redefine evolution.  Read more

In a recent post on Biologos, Kathryn Applegate concluded her criticism of Michael Behe. Interesting, though, was this statement: Many scientists agree with Behe that evolution may have been guided in some mysterious way by a Mind. This is very interesting, precisely because the core of ID is whether or not the origins of life (including evolution) have been guided by a mind (or a designer, or an agent, depending on your terminology). It is interesting that Biologos and the Intelligent Design movement converge at this point, precisely because it is really the only point of ID that matters. Applegate has several criticisms of Behe and his methods. I don’t care to get into whether or not they are legitimate Read More ›

As long as it’s NOT about their love for evolution. It is common to hear that the Nazis utterly lacked morality. Of course, that satisfies deep anger. But is it true? University of California professor Richard Weikart’s recent book, Hitler’s Ethic: The Nazi Pursuit of Evolutionary Progress (Palgrave Macmillan, 2009), offers an illuminating answer: No. Hitler’s Ethic (a companion to his From Darwin to Hitler, Palgrave Macmillan, 2004) demonstrates that the Nazis indeed had an ethic. It flowed directly and painstakingly from evolutionary theory, as understood in Germany at the time. I wish I had said this stuff. Come to think of it, I at least reported it here. Subscribe to Salvo, one of the few pubs worth reading these Read More ›