Saturday Fun: Adapa’s DDD on Display

Sometimes an example of Darwinist Derangement Syndrome (see UD’s glossary) is just too delicious to allow it to languish deep in a comment thread.  Here’s an exchange between Adapa and WJM in the Way Forward thread: First, Adapa claims that science has “conclusively demonstrated” that “unguided evolution can produce observed diversity of life: Adapa @99: […]

FYI-FTR: What about ONH’s, vs invisible Rain Fairies, Salt Leprechauns and Planet pushing angels etc.?

The latest cluster of dismissive talking points on the design inference pivot on caricatures describing invisible fairy-tale like supernatural entities. These need to be answered for record, and so let me headline a comment post that addresses these in the context of the agit-prop message dominance rhetorical tactics they represent, augmenting a bit using the […]

FYI-FTR: Is KS actually treating the design inference on FSCO/I and unguided evolution “equally” as regards ONH claims etc.?

Despite claims to the contrary, no. Let’s roll the tape on a further expose of the type of rhetoric we are facing. (And no, as is now usual, KS did not respond to the point by point refutation and correction of his argument. Which, sadly, speaks volumes on the underlying mindset.) Clipping, 221 in the […]

FYI-FTR: But Orgel didn’t mean what Dembski did when he spoke of Specified Complexity — NOT

One of the rhetorical gambits we are currently encountering is an attempt to drive a wedge between Dembski’s use of “Specified Complexity” and Orgel’s.  Accordingly, I noted as below at 83 in VJT’s CSI thread: _____________ >> I have always emphasised functionally specific complex organisation and associated information, FSCO/I, which is what is directly relevant to […]

FYI-FTR: Understanding the (non-circular) reality of CSI and FSCO/I in light of general and scientific inductive reasoning

One of the currently popular objections to the concept of functionally specific complex organisation and associated information (FSCO/I) and its super-set Complex Specified Information (CSI) is that these are unscientific ill-founded, logically circular concepts. The objection is actually goundless but it is easy to lose sight of the true balance on the merits in the […]

Mouse gene expression reveals “widespread differences” from humans

It is fair to say that the purpose of lab work with mice was not to elucidate disparities between their genome and ours.

Philosopher Laszlo Bencze on the Wilson–Dawkins flap

Bencze: natural selection becomes a kind of god or spirit or “force” as Luke Skywalker might have said.

Fri Nite Frite: 20 animals that can kill you

courtesy National Geographic They’re not in your home, right? So just watch and sleep tite. Nite nite. PS: If really scared, give to charities that keep them in wildernesses far way. Also, adopt a homeless kitty cat. Cats drive off alligators, tree bears, and claw-rake cobras. Follow UD News at Twitter!

Why mammals kill infants with another key omission (for humans) – the wicked stepmother

One gets so befogged with the huge stupid social noise around Darwinism that one forgets even the real history of the human race!

A key omission from the Darwinian catechism on why some mammals kill off infants?

Now, what is really interesting is that Zimmer avoids saying “And that explains why some men murder their stepkids.”

A little more background on E.O. Wilson calling Dawkins a “journalist”

Still not clear? No, because nature just doesn’t fit into either of these guys’ boxes, really. This still feels like a moment of Darwinism in decline.

Did human faces really evolve to look unique due to natural selection?

No. The finding is more consistent with no selection. People just accept facial features that are not abnormal.

Dinosaur extinction insights available near a New Jersey strip mall?

If so, good. We don’t know nearly enough about extinction, which is the grim third alternative to evolution and stasis.

Putting a Stake in the Heart of the “Science is Neutral and Objective” Cliché with One Chart

The next time you hear some maroon* tell you that science is an objective, neutral, self-correcting project whose only purpose is to conduct a dispassionate search for truth, show them this chart. 95% of the models are wrong. It would be one thing if 50% came out predicting warmer than actual and 50% came out […]

Viruses NOT fourth domain of life, says RealClearScience editor

Berezow: The whole affair is not academic but rather raises anew the question “What exactly is life, and how did it evolve?”

More on Emergent Poofery

This morning I looked up into the sky and saw several hundred geese flying in a formation that appeared to be a singly undulating mass. It reminded me of the schools of silver fish I have seen while diving in the Caribbean that also seem to move as a single mass (those who have seen […]

Dawkins: Design Theorist

WJM reminds us of a couple of famous design theorists: Darwin and Dawkins. All that follows is WJM. For that matter, even Charles Darwin argued that the existence of a single IC system (though he didn’t use that word) would falsify his evolutionary hypothesis: If it could be demonstrated that any complex organ existed which […]

Dawkins stands by views on Down syndrome (abort), sexual harassment (stop whining), pedophilia, etc.

Darwin’s atheists want him to shut up. No, no, Dick, keep talking, keep talking.

We saw this show before, right? “Hiding” books about design in nature in the bookstore

See the Amazon rankings for Meyer’s Darwin’s Doubt vs.Dawkins’s God Delusion vs. Barnes & Noble’s shelving preferences (religion vs. science?!). Now let B&N close quietly.

Further to Wilson dismissing Dawkins as a (mere) “journalist”

If Dawkins is only a hack like me – doesn’t that raise the question whether the same could be said of Wilson?

Next Page »