In Understanding evolution is crucial to debate Sally Lehrman of the Boston Globe writes:

intelligent design proponents claim that schools should do a better job of explaining evolution. They may very well be right.

Unfortunately, this was the only good line in an otherwise horrible piece of biased tabloid style editorializing by Lehrman, who appears to have gladly become a part of the propaganda machine of the National Center for Selling Evolution (NCSE).

She is indeed correct to say the ID proponents are right. ID proponents are advocating that Darwin’s theory be taught in the way that Charles Darwin would have wanted his theory be taught. It was Darwin who said:

A fair result can be obtained only by fully stating and balancing the facts and arguments on both sides of each question

To that end, a book consistent with Darwin’s wishes, Explore Evolution, was written and promoted by several individuals affiliated with one of the nation’s top-rated think tanks, The Discovery Institute.
Read More ›

In the most commented entry in this blog’s history (go here), I referred to Kevin Padian as “the Archie Bunker Professor of Paleobiology at Cal Berkeley.” On further reflection, it seems that standard evolutionary reasoning allows us to say that Kevin Padian actually is Archie Bunker: One of the beauties of evolutionary theory is that it eliminates essentialism from the biological world. There’s nothing that makes humans human and fundamentally distinguishes them from their putative apelike ancestors. Darwin himself made this point in THE DESCENT OF MAN: “The difference in mind between man and the higher animals, great as it is, certainly is one of degree and not of kind. We have seen that the senses and intuitions, the various Read More ›

Our webmaster was working with the server people to fix the 404 error that’s been coming up lately. Unfortunately, that temporarily deleted all our posts back to mid-July. We’re back up and running. –WmAD

He might just take you up on it: That lovely trilobite tattoo now resides on Michael Ruse’s right arm, thanks to a dare from one of his students.

I thought this was worth sharing: On Page 8 of a Report from the National Research Council there is an interesting admission: “Natural selection based solely on mutation is probably not an adequate mechanism for evolving complexity.” Of course the report itself supports the concept of Darwinian evolution. But I think the admission that mutation is an insufficient mechanism is significant. They invoke lateral transfer of genes as the alternate explanation: “More important, lateral gene transfer and endosymbiosis are probably the most obvious mechanisms for creating complex genomes…” Of course this begs the question; where did the genes come from that are being laterally transferred? As far as I saw in the report, the authors only indirectly address this problem Read More ›

Why Europe has been in decline for so long:

At the Post-Darwinist, I received a message in my inbox regarding my update to the file I keep up on opinion polls relevant to the intelligent design controversy:

Immigrant from Europe, I have been living in the country for a little over 7 years now.
SInce then, I have been flabbergasted by the creationism-intelligent design movement in the States. Before coming here, I have never, ever seen anyone even remotely question evolution, and this in a number of countries were I have stayed and lived. To be fully exact, in none of what we usually call “civilized” countries; not to put some countries down but just that there education level is not at the typical “western world” level.

I am always amazed by hearing comments by citizens of this most advanced country about what has been accepted as basic fact, not even subject to discussion outside the physical walls of churches, in all advanced countries.

This post is not intended to hurt anyone. I would just like to understand why and how a vast number of American came to so firmly believe in creationism (or intelligent design if you want to call it that name). – xxxxxx

I assume that by “this country” my correspondent meant the United States. I replied, a tad frostily, Read More ›

I was just reading this fairly-well written article, and came upon one of the last paragraphs. It’s an interesting take by a, shall we say, “non-scientist”: “These scientists argue that only ‘rational agents’ could have possessed the ability to design and organise such complex systems. Whether or not they are right (and I don’t know), their scientific argument about the absence of evidence to support the claim that life spontaneously created itself is being stifled – on the totally perverse grounds that this argument does not conform to the rules of science which require evidence to support a theory.” You have to like this logic: the scientific community doesn’t want to entertain the idea of ID with its implicit argument Read More ›

(This is my most recently published ChristianWeek column, focusing on stuff that religious people supposedly used to believe that no one ever believed (except maybe some gullible materialists). ) The ignorance and opposition to science of religious folk has been staple of antireligious tracts for centuries. Often, the tales remind me of bogus miracle stories – so good they can’t be false. Two recent examples are worth noting: Religious folk, we have been told, opposed anesthesia in childbirth because women should suffer the Biblical curse of Eve (Gen 3:16). Medical historian A. D. Farr actually went to the trouble of methodically searching the literature from Britain in the 1840s and 1850s, when modern anesthesia during childbirth was first introduced. He Read More ›

In “Global Warming Propaganda Factory” American Thinker, (Aug. 03, 2007) Christopher J. Alleva describes how the “Society for Environmental Journalists” provides Climate change: A guide to the information and disinformation. Alleva observes: “Except for the seventh chapter titled with the freighted descriptive: “Deniers, Dissenters and Skeptics“, the guide is a one sided presentation that resoundingly affirms global warming and puts down anyone with a different point of view. The site is a virtual digest of the global warming industry. If you’re looking for a road map to the special interest groups behind the hysteria, this is the place to go. The journalist members of this association have obviously abandoned all pretense of objectivity.” The Society of Professional Journalists provides a major Read More ›

The Society for Vertebrate Paleontology, be it noted, has denounced the recently opened Creation Museum in Petersburg, Kentucky: Dr. Catherine Badgley, a professor at the University of Michigan and president of the Society of Vertebrate Paleontology, remarked, “according to the Creation Museum, the history of life is short, sin-ridden, and laden with moralizing imperatives. In contrast, the real fossil record shows that this long history is brimming with discoveries of new kinds of animals, plants, and environments, inviting people to use their unusual minds to question, to reason, and to wonder at life’s remarkable variety.” Unusual minds? Interesting choice of words. But what on earth has happened to the Society for Invertebrate Paleontology? Why aren’t they chiming in? Maybe next Read More ›

Here’s an update on the post below, which I wrote on the basis of a report from a friend who attended the meeting. I’ve been having difficulty downloading the file in question, but I wrote to the four debate participants about the apparent omission. Peter Bentley got back to me as follows: Bill, Ths part of the debate was in jest –we all were laughing, and it was not deleted from the audio — you can listen to it yourself a minute or so before the applause right at the end. The only parts removed during the editing process were minor pauses while microphones were taken to questioners. Peter. ================================ I reported on July 19, 2007 here at UD that Read More ›

Medical animator David Bolinsky has worked with Harvard University to produce an incredible animation of the nano-machines in the cell.  You can see part of it here:  http://www.ted.com/index.php/talks/view/id/147 Note in particular one statement Bolinsky makes:  “No life is possible without these machines.”  One wonders if Bolinsky has stopped to think about the origin of life (abiogensesis) implications of his statement.  If no life is posibble without these nano-machines, where did the nano-machines come from?  Note that when Bolinsky calls these objections “machines” he is not making an analogy to a machine.  These objects are in fact small bio-machines.  Question of the day for the Darwinists who visit our site:  If life on earth is not possible without the existence of these Read More ›

Brown haze from burning biomass in Asia and Africa may contribute regionally as much as greenhouse gas emissions to anthropogenic climate warming according to reports in Nature. Designing efficient cookstoves for the poor could improve their livelihood, improve health, and the environment. How would investing in cookstoves compare to carbon sequestration? The heat is on – Nature, Editor’s Summary 2 August 2007 “By 2001, it was realized that the thick brown haze discovered over the Arabian Sea during the Indian Ocean Experiment (INDOEX: 1997-1999) was a persistent dry-season feature above Southern Asia. A UNEP report in 2002 raised concerns of major climate disruption if the sources of the haze, including biomass burning, were not controlled. . . . Atmospheric solar Read More ›

“Many Paste Babies are being born with advanced maturity, well developed personalities, and mature physical features,” said Casey Skinlu, a spokesman for the FDA who is now cracking down on Mutation Paste in America. More details are at TheBRITES.org

As the Darwin bicentennial looms (2009) and the flapdoodle flaps, we are treated to ridiculous hagiography and soothing, reassuring spin on how Darwinism can live harmoniously with the non-materialist beliefs of the peoples of Earth.

Meanwhile, a friend draws my attention to Taner Edis. Read More ›