Thanks to our indefatigable programmers at Darwinalia Inc., the new and improved version of Panda-Monium is now out: go here.

Bob Zelnick, well known news personality and chair of the BU journalism school, is organizing a debate on whether ID should be taught in conjunction with conventional evolutionary theory. The debate will feature Edward Sisson and me on the ID side and Eugenie Scott and James Trefil on the evolutionist side. The debate will take place at Boston University on Wednesday, November 2, 2005. Stay tuned for details. I’ve been informed that CSPAN is expected to cover the debate.

Here’s a proposal from a friend of mine for Darwinalia, Inc. With some additional work, it may have commercial possibilities. Read More ›

The September 17th issue of the New Scientist features ten articles on “The World’s Ten Biggest Ideas.” These include the “Big Bang,” “Science,” and “Evolution.” Who did the article on evolution. You guessed it: Read More ›

I’ve already adverted to the 38 Nobelists who decided to go after ID to discredit it before the Kansas State Board of Education (go here; and here for their amazingly candid letter). The questions you should be asking yourself are these:

• Why did Elie Wiesel (or whoever put him up to it) put so much energy into getting these Nobel winners to sign that letter? Read More ›

Peter Ward imagines he is offering a devastating argument against teaching ID by asking us to consider the pedagogical value of teaching a flat earth (“Advocates of Intelligent Design Would Dumb Down Students”). Question: Is it possible to teach Darwin’s Origin of Species without considering ID as Darwin’s proper foil and counterpart? Answer: NO. Question: Is it possible to teach Newtonian mechanics without considering the flat earth as Newton’s proper foil and counterpart? Answer: YES. Read More ›

Have a look at http://www.ncseweb.org/meeting.asp. One of my colleagues describes reading this page as “watching a car wreck.” I’m just sorry we can’t get a percentage cut from all the speaking engagements they are getting as a result of attacking us. Life is so unfair. Several things things should impress you about this page. First, the number of talks to atheist organizations; second, the number of talks paid for by university biology departments; and third, Eugenie Scott’s willingness to travel. Accordingly, a friend of mine proposes the following motto for Scott: “I will pay any price, bear any burden, meet any hardship, support any friend, oppose any foe, in order to prove that there is no controversy over Darwinism on Read More ›

Nobel Laureates urge rejection of intelligent design
Thursday, September 15, 2005
Lawrence Journal-World
http://www2.ljworld.com/news/2005/sep/15/nobel_laureates_urge_rejection_intelligent_design/?breaking

TOPEKA — A group of 38 Nobel Laureates headed by Holocaust survivor and Nobel Peace Prize winner Elie Wiesel have asked the Kansas State Board of Education to reject science standards that criticize evolution.

Read More ›

http://blogcritics.org/archives/2005/09/15/205441.php

Left to Right: Ellie Crystal, Jon Stewart, Edward Larson, William Dembski

I particularly like this postmortem of last night’s panel on The Daily Show with Jon Stewart. It’s from the Internet Infidels (you can find more negative reviews of my performance on last night’s panel at talk.origins):

I was majorly disappointed in that The Daily Show chose a panel group format last night in their discussion of evolution. I think more harm than good was dealt to the side of evolution. Read More ›

Looks like Northwestern has entered the evolution wars with an indoctrination minor. Check out this link: http://www.northwestern.edu/newscenter/stories/2005/09/evolution.html.

Oh, the temptations that scientists face: http://www.fortune.com/fortune/print/0,15935,1101810,00.html.

Thanks to a loyal ID supporter, the fledgling corporation conceived on this blog earlier this week, namely, Darwinalia, has now entered the computer gaming industry. Darwinalia’s new game is titled “Panda-Monium.” To play it, go here. A more sophisticated commercial version will be available soon. [UPDATE: Paul Myers has just posted at The Panda’s Thumb a short note about Panda-Monium titled “I think we’re getting under someone’s skin” (go here). Presumably he means my skin. Get a life, Paul. No, I’m not upset with you and the members of your select little club. I’m laughing at you. And I will continue to laugh at you.]

Is it fair to say that the “biologists of the future” to whom Carl Woese is referring will not be Darwinian? The idea of a last common community, with a communally sophisticated biochemistry, raises another question: how did all this evolve? This is for someone else to answer, says Woese. “We don’t understand how to create novelty from scratch – that’s a question for biologists of the future.” http://www.nature.com/cgi-taf/DynaPage.taf?file=/nature/journal/v427/n6976/full/427674a_fs.html Is it too much to speculate that maybe, just maybe, creating novelty from scratch might be the work of a designing intelligence??