William Dembski
At Evolution News: Rosenhouse’s Whoppers: The Environment as a Source of Information
William Dembski writes: I am responding again to Jason Rosenhouse about his book The Failures of Mathematical Anti-Evolutionism. See my earlier posts here and here. In Rosenhouse’s book, he claims that “natural selection serves as a conduit for transmitting environmental information into the genomes of organisms.” (p. 215) I addressed this claim briefly in my review, indicating that conservation of information shows it to be incomplete and inadequate, but essentially I referred him to technical work by me and colleagues on the topic. In his reply, he remains, as always, unpersuaded. So let me here give another go at explaining the role of the environment as a source of information for Darwinian evolution. As throughout this response, I’m addressing the unwashed middle. Darwinian evolution depends on Read More ›
At Evolution News: An Evolutionary Mathematician Flunks Biology
At Evolution News: Conservation of Information — The Theorems
At Evolution News: Conservation of Information — The Idea
At Evolution News: From Darwinists, a Shift in Tone on Nanomachines
Did someone mention Bill Dembski’s Being as Communion?
Steve Meyer on the logic of design detection
Dembski: Is truth just what your peers will let you get away with saying?
Bill Dembski offers some thoughts on the current state of Christian apologetics
At YouTube: William Dembski: Gauging the Success of Intelligent Design
Design inference: AI, ID, and detecting deceit
New Video Presentation on YouTube: Intelligent Design & Scientific Conservatism
I have recently posted a new video on my Intelligent Design YouTube channel. In this video I discuss several areas in the philosophy of science and modern evolutionary biology, and their relationship to ID. These thoughts were prompted initially by an interesting paper by philosopher of science Jeffrey Koperski ‘Two Bad Ways to Attack Intelligent Design, and Two Good Ones’. Koperski thinks that one good way to critique ID is to point out that it violates principles like ‘scientific conservatism’. Because there are several potential naturalistic mechanisms on the table, even if orthodox neo-Darwinism fails, ID is an unnecessary proposal. To turn to design explanations would be to adjust our theories too drastically. I argue against this claim, concluding that Read More ›
ID theorists were right about junk DNA. Now here is an ID prediction about CRISPR gene editing
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 ›