Monthly Archives: January 2007
|January 24, 2007||Posted by Dave S. under Intelligent Design, Comp. Sci. / Eng., Science|
An article in the February 2007 Scientific American titled Molecular Lego talks about bis-amino acids and bis-peptides. These are synthetic amino acids and peptide chains formed from them.
|January 24, 2007||Posted by leebowman under Intelligent Design, Science|
The 1/29/07 issue of Time Magazine is captioned “Mind & Body Special Issue”, and starts out with a discussion of the brain’s geography, an endeavor well studied and categorized by now, but which is far overshadowed by the mystery of ‘consciousness’, often tagged as the ‘ghost within the neural machine’. Steven Pinker writes the centerpiece […]
|January 24, 2007||Posted by Dave S. under Off Topic||
As I was watching the Democratic response to President Bush’s State Of The Union speech tonight Senator Jim Webb played the United States Marine card three times (for himself, his brother, and his son all Marines). I take it personally when someone does that.
|January 24, 2007||Posted by William Dembski under Evolution, Darwinism|
I was reviewing recently Stuart Kauffman’s critique of the Darwinian selection mechanism and thought I would share the upshot of it here, especially in light of the recent discussion at UD concerning Haldane’s Dilemma: If selection could, in principle, accomplish Ã¢â‚¬Å“anything,Ã¢â‚¬Â then all the order in organisms might reflect selection alone. But, in fact, there […]
|January 23, 2007||Posted by scordova under Intelligent Design|
What are the speed limits of naturalistic evolution? We know from experience it takes time to evolve a species. Would naturalistic evolution be fast enough in geological time to turn a cow into a whale, an ape-like creature into a human? What are the speed limits of evolution?
|January 23, 2007||Posted by GilDodgen under Intelligent Design, Darwinism|
In the Haldane thread, DaveScot responded to a comment I made with this: On HaldaneÃ¢â‚¬â„¢s Dilemma, IÃ¢â‚¬â„¢ve determined the evolutionist argument goes like this: Orthodox evolution theory is a fact, not a theory. Therefore HaldaneÃ¢â‚¬â„¢s Dilemma must be wrong. I propose a corollary to DaveScot’s proposition: Orthodox evolution theory is a fact, not a theory. […]
|January 23, 2007||Posted by Dave S. under Education, Intelligent Design, Darwinism|
Intelligent design to feature in school RE lessons Alexandra Smith Tuesday January 23, 2007 EducationGuardian.co.uk Teenagers will be asked to debate intelligent design (ID) in their religious education classes and read texts by evolutionary biologist Richard Dawkins under new government guidelines.
|January 23, 2007||Posted by Dave S. under Intelligent Design|
Wikipedia suppresses Haldane’s Dilemma by Walter J. Remine The key figure — a limit of 1,667 beneficial mutations to explain human evolution — was brushed aside (by falsely blaming it on creationists, instead of acknowledging that it arises solely from evolutionary theory, evolutionary genetics, and J.B.S. Haldane). This key figure was repeatedly expunged from the […]
|January 23, 2007||Posted by Barry Arrington under Intelligent Design|
My grandfather hunted arrowheads, and he found them, hundreds of them. I was awed by his collection, and one of my most prized possessions is a frame containing 48 of his best specimens that I inherited from him. Nearly two decades after his death that frame is still hanging on the wall in the room […]
|January 22, 2007||Posted by William Dembski under Intelligent Design|
The theme of silent mutations that are not so silent has been addressed here at UD before (e.g., go here). Here’s a piece that elaborates on the significance of this recent finding: Silent No Longer: Researchers unearth another stratum of meaning in the genetic code By Ivan Amato The more scientists study the genetic code, […]
|January 21, 2007||Posted by GilDodgen under Intelligent Design|
In another forum, Denyse wrote: Bear with a simple lay hack here a moment: Why must we know a designer’s intentions in order to detect design? If the fire marshall’s office suspects arson, do the investigators worry much about WHY? Surely they investigate, confirm their finding, and turn the information over to other authorities and […]
|January 20, 2007||Posted by O'Leary under Intelligent Design|
I have been meaning for some time to set down my reasons for thinking that evolutionary psychology is only questionably a discipline. At least seven reasons occur to me (actually more, but these seven are top of mind):
|January 20, 2007||Posted by idnet.com.au under Intelligent Design|
In case any one accidentally comes to the (?obvious) conclusion that the finding of yet more evidently brilliant design in biology may support ID, everyone must include the customary clear homage to the creator of all life, NDE. Science Daily “Kenneth Breuer and Sharon Swartz are determined to understand the detailed aerodynamics of bat flight […]
|January 20, 2007||Posted by William Dembski under Evolution, Darwinism|
It’s amazing what passes for science these days (as well as what doesn’t): The first evidence that beauty is infectious is published today by scientists who have shown that when women see a rival smiling at a man, he becomes more attractive as a result. . . . Why has nature designed women to be […]
|January 19, 2007||Posted by scordova under Intelligent Design|
Through a little detective work, I found out where some of the Discovery Institute’s research funding has gone. It was an obscure comment in a paper that clued me in. The funding was for an exploration into the fundamental Speed Limits of Naturalistic Evolution. What was the plight of this exploration?
|January 19, 2007||Posted by Theodosius under Intelligent Design|
Bill asked me to introduce myself, and to describe an idea that came to me recently. I am a graduate student, working on philosophy of biology (at a university that shall remain nameless), nearing the dissertation stage. I am sure that everyone knows about the odious “Darwin Awards.” I have been concerned about this phenomenon […]
|January 19, 2007||Posted by Dave S. under Education, Evolution, Intelligent Design, Science|
Civic Scientific Literacy: A Necessity in the 21st Century
|January 18, 2007||Posted by Dave S. under Education, Evolution, Biology, Intelligent Design, Darwinism, Comp. Sci. / Eng., Science, Culture|
I read this Huffington post which notes that the U.S. leads Europe by quite a margin in those who reject orthodox evolution as scientific fact. They go on to an unsupported conclusion that this means the U.S. must be trailing in scientific and engineering accomplishments. Au contraire, mon ami, au contraire!
|January 18, 2007||Posted by William Dembski under Intelligent Design, Darwinism|
Pro-ID anti-Darwinism doctors are on the rise. Check out Physicians and Surgeons for Scientific Integrity and note their member list.
|January 18, 2007||Posted by Dave S. under Evolution, Biology, Off Topic, Culture|
Over at Respectful Insolence, Dr. David H. Gorski (a.k.a. Orac), goes off on a rant about how medical doctors, in this case Uncommon Descent contributor and surgeon Dr. David A. Cook, aren’t qualified to evaluate claims made by evolutionary biologists. Yet Dr. Gorski, also a surgeon, somehow believes himself qualified to evaluate evolutionary claims made […]