At Telic Thoughts, Mike Gene points out that PZ Myers would vote against tenure to an IDer: PZ Myers on Tenure and ID.

The question about tenure denial has been a question I’ve been trying to get reporters to inquire about since last Fall. As far as I can tell, the question has been mostly evaded or been obscured until recently.

If tenure is to be denied, how about hiring? If ID is grounds for denying tenure, then logically why should it stop there? How about the granting of PhDs, or master’s degrees, or bachelor’s degrees, or even entry into college? Read More ›

[From a colleague:] Sober is wrong in several ways. First, ID’s denial of it being religious does not rest on the fact that it does not specify the identity of the designer, but rather, the identity of the designer is irrelevant to the detection of design. Second, suppose someone in fact makes the argument that because nature cannot account for its own design, then only that which is outside of nature can do so. It seems to me that Sober’s rejection or acceptance of the argument should depend on its soundness or strength and not on its “religiosity.” Bringing in an argument’s religiosity as a reason to dismiss it seems to be a reversal of the genetic fallacy. We can Read More ›

It has come to my attention that Sober claims to be using Behe’s definition of irreducible complexity. Behe defines irreducible complexity as: A single system which is composed of several interacting parts that contribute to the basic function, and where the removal of any one of the parts causes the system to effectively cease functioning”. We can test this with structures like the flagellum through knockout experiments that remove bits of the structure so we can observe whether it continues to function. Thus the IC hypothesis makes predictions that can be tested. Sober predicts an intelligent agency that created the irreducibly complex structures in nature must itself be irreducibly complex. Can someone tell me how to go about removing bits Read More ›

Not much of a challenge. Sober’s argument is

1. If a system found in nature is irreducibly complex, then it was caused to exist by an intelligent designer.

2. Some of the minds found in nature are irreducibly complex.

3. Therefore some of the minds found in nature were caused to exist by an intelligent designer.

4. Any mind in nature that designs and builds an irreducibly complex system is itself irreducibly complex.

5. If the universe is finitely old and if cause precedes effect, then at least one of the minds found in nature was not created by any mind found in nature.

6. The universe is finitely old.

7. Causes precede their effects.

8. Therefore, there exists a supernatural intelligent designer.

Sober makes assumptions that ID does not.

Read More ›

Deciding whether the mini-ID theory has supernatural and religious implications is not as straightforward as seeing whether the word “God” appears in the statement “each irreducibly complex system found in nature was designed and produced by an intelligent being.” When independently plausible further assumptions are taken into account, the mini-ID theory entails the existence of a supernatural intelligent designer who made at least one of the minds found in nature. . . . The point I would make here is a different one – as Pennock (1999) notes, the Darwinian theory of evolution is silent on the question of whether a supernatural intelligent designer exists. This is not true of the mini-ID theory. In terms of the contents of theories, Read More ›

Global-warming alarmists intimidate dissenting scientists into silence http://www.opinionjournal.com/extra/?id=110008220 Nature paper shows that cell division is reversible Article: http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2006-04/omrf-rpn041006.php Paper: http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v440/n7086/pdf/nature04652.pdf Video: http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v440/n7086/extref/nature04652-s6.mov

unScientific American and Science News are reporting in (this) story that “darwinian debt”s are being generated by over-fishing and the result is that

Fast-growing fish therefore get penalized evolutionarily because they quickly become large enough to get caught…

Correct me if I’m wrong, but isn’t this nothing more than an exagerated example of dog-breeding (except with fish, of course)?

Read More ›

Question: What sort of scientific discovery will win the war for ID?

Answer: Something that will bring healing to the sick and make money for the biotech industry.

Here are some thoughts from Bill Dembski.

Keynote Address at RAPID (transcript courtesy IDEA UCSD)

Steganography

Finally, we come to the research theme that I find most intriguing. Steganography, if you look in the dictionary, is an archaism that was subsequently replaced by the term “cryptography.” Steganography literally means “covered writing.” With the rise of digital computing, however, the term has taken on a new life. Steganography belongs to the field of digital data embedding technologies (DDET), which also include information hiding, steganalysis, watermarking, embedded data extraction, and digital data forensics. Steganography seeks efficient (that is, high data rate) and robust (that is, insensitive to common distortions) algorithms that can embed a high volume of hidden message bits within a cover message (typically imagery, video, or audio) without their presence being detected. Conversely, steganalysis seeks statistical tests that will detect the presence of steganography in a cover message.

Consider now the following possibility: What if organisms instantiate designs that have no functional significance but that nonetheless give biological investigators insight into functional aspects of organisms. Such second-order designs would serve essentially as an “operating manual,” of no use to the organism as such but of use to scientists investigating the organism. Read More ›

Move over Eric. Paul Myers sees your images of ebola killing 90% of humanity and raises you visions of ethical infanticide. Says Myers on his blog: I’m in favor of voluntary late term abortions (where premature birth would impose severe economic hardship, for instance), and can even consider situations where infanticide is ethically tenable. Funny thing is Myers didn’t get a standing ovation. It’s all in the delivery, Paul.

Cornell is considered by some to be among the top 12 universities in the world, and Cornell has an IDist in their biology department! John Sanford is a very successful professor of biology at Cornell and is inventor of the Gene Gun. In his testimony at the Kansas Hearings in May 2005, he revealed he was once a naturalistic evolutionist before becoming an IDist.

Sanford was so successful in developing genetic technologies and receiving patents he was able to retire early. To my knowledge, he still is a courtesy professor at Cornell. Crevo pointed out that Sanford even has a pro-ID book Genetic Entropy: The Mystery of the Genome.

A reviewer writes of Sanford’s book: Read More ›

The study by Bridgham et al (2006) published in the April 7 issue of Science is the lamest attempt yet — and perhaps the lamest attempt that’s even possible — to deflect the problem that irreducible complexity poses for Darwinism…

This continues the venerable Darwinian tradition of making grandiose claims based on piddling results.

— Michael Behe

Read More ›

Baylor U. Denies Tenure to Intelligent-Design Proponent By PAULA WASLEY, THOMAS BARTLETT, and AISHA LABI From the issue dated April 14, 2006 TENURE DENIED: Controversy is brewing at Baylor University, where Francis J. Beckwith, a prominent and widely published Christian philosopher and legal scholar, was recently denied tenure — some say for his conservative religious views. Mr. Beckwith, 45, an associate professor and associate director of Baylor’s J.M. Dawson Institute of Church-State Studies, joined the faculty of the Baptist university in 2003. Since his appointment, there have been rumblings on the campus about Mr. Beckwith’s affiliation with the Discovery Institute, an intelligent-design think tank, and his writings promoting the teaching of intelligent design in public schools [[Beckwith’s writings argue that Read More ›

Dr. Kenneth R. Summy attended the Texas Academy of Science speech by Professor Eric Pianka. Dr. Summy sent an unsolicited letter to the President and the Board of Directors of the Texas Academy of Science that specifically states Forrest Mims did not misrepresent Pianka’s keynote address. =-=-=-=- Subj:Petition Date:4/10/2006 Time: 1:49:37 PM CST To: President and Board of Directors of the Texas Academy of Science Attached is a response I sent to Dr. Kathryn Perez regarding the allegation that Forrest Mims misrepresented the content of the keynote address at the recent TAS meeting. A lot of the cc’s listed in Dr. Perez’s original message failed to get through, so I am resending. Forrest Mims did not misrepresent anything regarding the Read More ›

Climate of Fear Global-warming alarmists intimidate dissenting scientists into silence. BY RICHARD LINDZEN Wednesday, April 12, 2006 12:01 a.m. EDT There have been repeated claims that this past year’s hurricane activity was another sign of human-induced climate change. Everything from the heat wave in Paris to heavy snows in Buffalo has been blamed on people burning gasoline to fuel their cars, and coal and natural gas to heat, cool and electrify their homes. Yet how can a barely discernible, one-degree increase in the recorded global mean temperature since the late 19th century possibly gain public acceptance as the source of recent weather catastrophes? And how can it translate into unlikely claims about future catastrophes? The answer has much to do Read More ›

In the comments here someone tried to say that RM+NS only applies after DNA and ribosomes have already appeared on the scene. This is nonsense. Read More ›