In the face of a grab bag of ideas like creation by ETs or countless universes (some run by cats), why does the idea of a Creator seem far out?
Tag: Ola Hössjer
At Mind Matters News: Our Universe Survived a Firing Squad and It’s Just an Accident?
Ola Hössjer: According to the Weak Anthropic Principle, we should not be surprised to live in a universe that harbors life. But I should add that, in our paper, “Cosmological Tuning Fine or Coarse?,” we compute or give an upper bound for the probability of a randomly generated universe to have a certain constant of nature, ending up within its life-permitting interval. We take the Weak Anthropic Principle into account — and still we come up with small probabilities for certain constant of natures or certain ratios or constants of nature.
At Mind Matters News: Can there be a general theory for fine-tuning?
Swedish mathematician Ola Hössjer, who is working on a general theory of fine tuning, sees the beauty of mathematics in the fact that seemingly unrelated features in cosmology and biology can be modeled using similar concepts.
At Mind Matters News: Life is so wonderfully finely tuned that it’s frightening
A mathematician who uses statistical methods to model the fine tuning of molecular machines and systems in cells reflects…
At Mind Matters News: Fine-tuning? How Bayesian statistics could help break a deadlock
Bayesian statistics are used, for example, in spam filter technology, identifying probable spam by examining vast masses of previous messages.
ID theorists publish new paper in Journal of Theoretical Biology
We hope the journal isn’t intimidated by Darwin’s Outrage Machine, Inc. Just think, some people are now allowed to bring this up. And not just as an inhouse titter, followed promptly by dismissal of the question.
Karsten Pultz comes to the defense of the Elsevier editors who say they did not know that the Hossjer–Thorvaldsen paper was ID-friendly
The editors need not, of course, sympathize with the ID perspective to think that evidence for it should be permitted to be discussed. At one time, that was a conventional intellectual position. But the Darwinians, as we’ve said here earlier, are an early flowering of Cancel Culture. No evidence may be discussed that may be thought to favor an Incorrect view.
Karsten Pultz offers some thoughts on the flap over the now-famous Thorvaldsen and Hössjer paper
It should also be considered that in his book Der Teil und das Ganze, Werner Heisenberg expresses his own and also Niels Bohrs’ doubt that random mutations could have produced any of the complex biological systems… Bohr adds that while natural selection obviously occurs it is the idea that new species come about by random changes, which is very hard to imagine, even if this is the only way science can explain it.
That notorious ID paper was the one most downloaded from the Journal…
Eventually, people, we are going to have to start rewarding the Darwinians for banning and persecuting advocates of design in nature. Look, guys, it’s only fair. Mediocrities steam themselves into near oblivion to destroy the idea and their efforts only fan the flames. Sadly, all we wanted was a serious discussion. We never asked them to be Roman candles.
Now the Journal of Theoretical Biology is publishing a rebuttal letter to the design-friendly paper
Which is fine in principle. But be realistic. The Darwin mob, an early flowering of Cancel Culture, will not be satisfied with anything less than retraction and the obliteration of the careers of everyone involved. If that is accomplished by scandalously spurious means, all the better for the mob. That increases its sense of power and self-justification. Saying NO! To them is an act of liberation.
Here’s the Twitter discussion of that ID-friendly paper at the Journal of Theoretical Biology
The Darwinist commenters below the tweet would put one in mind of coyotes except that coyotes must, perforce, have pack standards. They can’t just howl ANYTHING they please… Well, we shall see what happens next.
Journal editors now claim they didn’t “know” that the Thorvaldsen and Hossjer paper was ID-friendly
In Klinghoffer’s telling, maybe the editors thought the paper was okay, maybe even interesting. Then they got mobbed by Darwin thugs and now can’t cringe low enough to atone for their grievous error. Surely there’s a floor down there somewhere…
Cancel Culture lets an ID-friendly paper slip through the cracks
At ENST: “Sure enough, after Darwinists discovered the article, they succeeded in obtaining a “disclaimer” from the journal’s editors, who proclaimed their bias against ID. But the disclaimer actually made publication of the article all the more significant.”
Ola Hössjer and Ann Gauger sketch genetic scenarios for Adam and Eve
Wow. The Darwin trolls’ll miss Halloween to go after this one.
We could have come from two parents
Says a new paper at BIO-Complexity by Ola Hossjer and Ann Gauger.