Engineering is often thought of as one of the “lower” sciences. I propose the opposite, that the engineering disciplines are in the category of the most rigorous sciences (such as mathematics), because they expose themselves to empirical and logical invalidation. This is in complete contrast to Darwinian evolutionary “theory,” which is perpetually amorphous, explains everything and nothing at the same time, is impossible to pin down, and is impervious to logic, reason, mathematical scrutiny, or evidence. This is perhaps why an increasing number of us in the engineering community — especially the software-engineering community, since it is now obvious that living systems are fundamentally based on complex software rather than stochastic chemical interactions — find Darwinian explanations to be not Read More ›

At MSNBC’s Cosmic Log, Alan Boyle tells us “How tycoons will fuel space flight” (April 22, 2011):

With the shuttle program winding down, the future of American spaceflight may well depend on how starry-eyed tycoons spend their money — and some of NASA’s money as well. Read More ›

I was invited to review Karl Giberson and Francis Collins’ newest book, THE LANGUAGE OF SCIENCE AND FAITH, at patheos.com. Below are the first few paragraphs as well as a link to the entire review. —————————– BioLogos and Theistic Evolution: Selling the Product “There’s nothing wrong with selling one’s ideas. But it needs to be done honestly, and that’s just what I don’t find in this book.” By William A. Dembski, April 27, 2011 Editor’s Note: The following is the first piece in a four-part conversation between Dr. William Dembski and Dr. Karl Giberson, concerning Giberson and Francis Collins’ new book, The Language of Science and Faith: Straight Answers to Genuine Questions. Find more resources and discussion surrounding the book Read More ›

Non-materialist neuroscientists, friends of design, often talk about “mindfulness,” that is, the capacity of making changes in the brain by directing attention. Or, as psychiatrist Jeffrey Schwartz puts it, You are not your brain. Recent research suggests one difference mindfulness makes: Read More ›

No, not what you think: More from Raymond Tallis, this time What neuroscience cannot tell us about ourselves (New Atlantis, Fall 2010), debunking “the tropes of neuromythology.”:

So when we are talking about the brain, we are talking about nothing more than a piece of matter. If we keep this in mind, we will have enough ammunition to demonstrate the necessary failure of neuroscientific accounts of consciousness and conscious behavior. Read More ›

PART I: BASIC PREMISES

Many predictions of ID flow from two underlying hypotheses, both of which are open to scientific investigation and refutation. If you miss these, however, other ID predictions may not make sense, since many arise from them in an important way. It is my belief that much of the puzzlement regarding ID predictions results from not being familiar with these two often unspoken premises. Read More ›

Dane Leif Asmark sends this PowerPoint (static here), which notes the poster campaign, the film, and debates … in most Western countries, not half as much is reported.

Written debate with the Hungarian Skeptic Society- Written rules for the debate, moderation.

– Four exchanges of letters.

-Is ID a reasonable answer to the origin of the living world?”

Living world? Shades of Darwin’s banished co-theorist Wallace and the World of Life.
Sources don’t think most Western counties are doing a tenth of this. Read More ›

BCSE’s Roger Stanyard doesn’t hold back in his anger at Richard Dawkins I haven ‘t heard Roger Stanyard of BCSE speak about ID or Creationism in quite such strong tones as he denounces Richard Dawkins and friends. He calls the ‘Why Evolution is True’ blog a ‘kangeroo court baying for blood’ and  ‘One of the most frightening things I’ve seen in a long time’ because of the letter’s ‘utter viciousness’ and ‘self-righteousness.’ And that isn’t even the worst of it as he denounces Dawkins, but I will refrain from reprinting more here. Check out the link if you wish to read more, especially posts by Stanyard at 25/4/11 6:43 pm and 26/4/11  8:07 am.

Digital codes can be protected against failure. A variety of options have been explored by computer programmers because it is important to catch malfunctions early and alert the user to a problem. “In digital codes, the bits are usually packed into sets of eight bits called bytes. Normally, seven bits are used to record information and one bit – called the ‘parity bit’ – is used for mutation protection, usually denoted as error protection. The seven-bit string 1000001, for example, codes the letter A and 0110011 codes the number 3. If the number of 1’s in the seven-bit string is even, the parity bit is given the value 1, else the value 0. If one of the seven information bits Read More ›

The contest (Saturday, April 16) asked: What would be acceptable evidence for other universes? And the prize is a copy of The Nature of Nature , which goes to Brent at 16 (see below).

(Next contest still in progress: Is Richard Dawkins or Francis Collins the cuter poster boy for selling Darwinism? Closes April 30.)

Readers may recall Steven Weinberg’s comment, quoted,  that Read More ›

Here.

(CNN) — Interstellar radio has lost one of its most avid and high-profile listeners.A collection of sophisticated radio telescopes in California that scan the heavens for extraterrestrial signals has suspended operations because of lack of funding, a spokeswoman said Monday.

The Search for Extraterrestrial Intelligence Institute operates the Allen Telescope Array, the field of dish-like scopes some 300 miles north of San Francisco. The telescopes are a joint effort of SETI and University of California-Berkeley’s Radio Astronomy Lab and have been funded largely by Microsoft co-founder Paul Allen, who donated more than $25 million to the project.

Comments? Read More ›

GNU in the computer software development community stands for GNU’s Not Unix (a recursive acronym — anyone familiar with computer algorithms understands recursive, or self-referential, self-calling procedures). Unix is the famous computer operating system developed in academia during the early 1970s, for which the nearly universal Kernighan and Ritchie C programming language was invented, once it became obvious that the limitations of assembly languages (which are CPU instruction-set specific and provide no portability or programming structure) were found to be inadequate for the task. The C language was invented as essentially a portable assembler, which provided both low-level CPU access and high-level library capability. GNU/Linux is an open-source operating system which emulates and mirrors Unix capabilities but with the source Read More ›

Jack Scanlan, over at Panda’s Thumb, asks, “Does intelligent design have a dualistic assumption, not a theistic one?”

Interesting question, his point being that dualism is not the same thing as theism.

A dualist may hold that nature is governed by a meta-nature, without that latter realm being “God.” Without being God, a meta-nature could exhibit in nature what looks like intelligence (and is). Comments?

There are many types of dualism: Read More ›

…  here’s Jerry Coyne on Giberson and Collins’ Biologos: Finally, Uncle Karl [Giberson] and Francis Collins have a new book! It’s called The Language of Science and Faith (the subtitle is Straight Answers to Genuine Questions), and appears to be based largely on the “frequently asked questions” section of BioLogos. Now Collins wasn’t supposed to be engaged in this Jebus-proselytizing after he took up the reins of the National Institutes of Health (NIH), but I’ve seen assurances (I can’t find them at the moment) that his contribution to the book preceded his NIH directorship. I doubt, however, whether the volume will do much for his reputation. Whether the volume “does much for his reputation” depends principally on who needs the Read More ›

Overhearing the squabble noted by Steno between “gnu atheists” Jerry Coyne and P.Z. Myers on the one hand and National Center for Science Education and its British counterpart, BCSE (Darwin schools lobbies) on the other, my first thought was of a proverb I learned as a child: “When thieves fall out, honest men come by their own.”

The point isn’t, of course, that any of these people are thieves; the proverb expresses a general truth: There are fights people can’t afford to be in, but they are in them anyway and others will benefit from the fallout.

Essentially, Coyne and other “gnu”* atheists are attacking the Darwin-in-the-schools lobbies for pretending that Darwinism is compatible with traditional Judaism, Christianity, or Islam. He’s right, and Darwin thought much the same thing, as we know from his private notebooks, released some years back. We’ve been saying hose things ourselves for years here about Evolution Sunday, Michael Dowd’s thirty-three ring circus of “evolutionary Christians,” and other “dhimmis for Darwin” enterprises. But what is the consequence of the “gnu atheists’ squabbling publicly with the dhimmis for Darwin and making sure the world knows about it?

One thought: Next time you are pestered by the “Jesus loves Darwin and you should too!” crowd, I suggest sending them the link to Jerry Coyne’s open letter and suggest they discuss it with him, not you. When Darwinists disagree, who can decide?

And if local school boards are smarming us that Darwinism is without religious significance, point out that among Darwinists themselves, that view is highly contested, never mind what the ID community thinks.

*Jerry Coyne’s perspective on the squabble is interesting because he may have invented the term “gnu atheist”, Read More ›