http://www.bbc.co.uk/sn/tvradio/programmes/horizon/war.shtml (Yes, that’s me.)

http://www.refcm.org/RICDiscussions/Science-Scripture/X%20Evolution/keeping_an_eye_on_evolution.htm

A religious college that sticks to its traditions is not — or at least not automatically — guilty of intolerance. . . . What is going on at Baylor University when the provost undercuts the new president, John Lilley, by promising that he won’t be allowed to interview new candidates for faculty positions? For rest of story, go here: http://www.nationalreview.com/comment/oakes200601260819.asp.

http://www.politicalaffairs.net/article/view/2624/1/147/

By popular demand…

Julian Huxley’s Confession

by John A. Davison

Read More ›

And now for another amazing example of what natural selection can accomplish (or not):

Press Release
Heidelberg, 22 January 2006
http://www.embl.org/aboutus/news/press/2006/press22jan06.html

The closest look ever at the cell’s machines: The first genome-wide screen for protein complexes is completed

“To carry out their tasks, most proteins work in dynamic complexes that may contain dozens of molecules,” says Giulio Superti-Furga, who launched the large-scale project at Cellzome four years ago. “If you think of the cell as a factory floor, up to now, we’ve known some of the components of a fraction of the machines. That has seriously limited what we know about how cells work. This study gives us a nearly complete parts list of all the machines, and it goes beyond that to tell us how they populate the cell and partition tasks among themselves.” The study combined a method of extracting complete protein complexes from cells [tandem affinity purification, developed in 2001 by Bertrand Séraphin at EMBL], mass spectrometry and bioinformatics to investigate the entire protein household of yeast, turning up 257 machines that had never been observed. It also revealed new components of nearly every complex already known. Read More ›

Richard Dawkins should be very pleased that his efforts at educating the British public have met with such overwhelming success. He has much to look forward to in his retirement:

Britons unconvinced on evolution
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/4648598.stm

Over 55s were less likely to opt for evolution than other groups

More than half the British population does not accept the theory of evolution, according to a survey.
Furthermore, more than 40% of those questioned believe that creationism or intelligent design should be taught in school science lessons. Read More ›

I made a new category “Comment Moderation” to explain the policy at Uncommon Descent. All I’m doing for now is collecting Bill Dembski’s previous statements on it in one place (here) and further stipulating that nothing has changed. 4/16/05 Comments about Comments 5/15/05 About This Blog 11/30/05 Why I ruthlessly edit comments on this blog

University of Pittsburgh Professor of Anthropology Jeffrey H. Schwartz has consistently swum against the neo-Darwinian mainstream, and this new 30Jan2006 paper in the New Anatomist with University of Salerno Professor of Biochemistry Bruno Maresca is no exception. The starting point of their argument is clear: Neo-Darwinism has failed and does not fit the evidence. For instance, in the section titled “Molecular and Morphological Contradiction” (pp. 39-40), Maresca and Schwartz write: Read More ›

Here’s the transcript of the NPR interview with Vonnegut that I mentioned yesterday on this blog: Read More ›

Debating Design: From Darwin to DNA
by William A. Dembski and Michael Ruse (Editors)
Cambridge University Press, 2004

Review by Gal Kober on Jan 22nd 2006
http://mentalhelp.net/books/books.php?type=de&id=2982

The anatomy of man is a key to the anatomy of ape.” Karl Marx (Introd. to a Contrib. to a Critique of Polit. Economy, 1957)

Intelligent Design and the war waged by its proponents against evolutionary biology and the naturalistic practices of science are more a matter of public affairs than they are philosophical or scientific issues. Debating Design: From Darwin to DNA, a volume recently published by Cambridge University Press, aims at providing “a comprehensive and even-handed overview of the debate concerning biological origins,” and specifically, the more vocal aspects of this ‘debate’, namely, the conflict between evolutionary biology and supporters of intelligent design. Although it succeeds in doing that, it also has a seriously negative side. Read More ›

How much do most of us really know about the other mammals we have so much in common with? Or perhaps I should ask how little do most of us really know. Here’s a thought provoking article from naturalist Dr. Daphne Sheldrick who spent 30 years working with elephants in the wild and in captivity.

Elephant Emotion By Daphne Sheldrick Read More ›

Science and the Church: What it means to question Darwinism
by Herbert London

http://www.cruxproject.org/ScienceChurch.htm

Christoph Cardinal Schonborn, the Catholic archbishop of Vienna, recently
caused a firestorm in intellectual circles when he made the rather obvious
argument that Darwinism has many unexplained characteristics. The New York
Times responded reflexively by suggesting that the Church was turning away
from “modern science.” Read More ›

MOST of the small satellite galaxies around the Andromeda galaxy are lined up in a single plane that slices through its spiral disc, an alignment that suggests the satellites are floating on a river of dark matter.

Read More ›