Monthly Archives: February 2014
|February 28, 2014||Posted by News under Intelligent Design, Just For Fun|
You just get done breaking the ice, and you look up and … whaaa?
|February 28, 2014||Posted by News under extinction, Intelligent Design, News|
Curiously, Jurassic Park author Michael Crichton called consensus science an extremely pernicious development. And aspiring mammoth cloner George Church praised Steve Meyer’s Darwin’s Doubt.
|February 28, 2014||Posted by News under Culture, Darwinism, Intelligent Design, News|
but it turns out, most Democrats could not correctly answer both that the Earth goes around the Sun and that this takes a year. The two divergences are treated as if they are exactly the same, of course, and guess which gets the more publicity?
|February 28, 2014||Posted by News under Genetics, Human evolution, Intelligent Design, News|
Is the point of Mooney’s claims to constantly diminish the claimed figure but never quite get there? All he is really diminishing is the apparent value of the genome as a source of information about life forms. If he never quite gets to 100%, he still has a story.
|February 28, 2014||Posted by News under Intelligent Design, News, Peer review|
Despite the fact that information not matter underlies the universe, thinking appears just too old-fashioned now. 😉
|February 28, 2014||Posted by News under Cambrian explosion, Informatics, Intelligent Design, News|
A friend writes to say that, listening to the Steve Meyer vs. Charles Marshall radio debate, he sensed that the message regarding the centrality of “information” to the history of life is starting get across.
|February 28, 2014||Posted by News under Evolution, News|
The theory goes from worm to man to nature without a pit stop.
|February 27, 2014||Posted by vjtorley under Intelligent Design|
Did Charles Darwin ever invoke his own theory in order to justify the extermination of one race by another? If the term “extermination” refers to systematic genocide, the answer is an emphatic “No”; but if “extermination” is defined more broadly to include the displacement and consequent extinction of one race by another, more technologically advanced […]
|February 27, 2014||Posted by News under Exoplanets, Intelligent Design, News|
How about: Winning tickets almost as rare as orthodontics for hens.
|February 27, 2014||Posted by News under Human evolution, Intelligent Design, News|
Just think, these folk are the heirs of the Enlightenment.
|February 27, 2014||Posted by News under Extraterrestrial life, Intelligent Design, Just For Fun, News|
How about a rock that does not have an aging process and has negligible metabolism, but does have a brain composed of non-living elements? … To avoid needless novelization, let’s assume that it is of low, not high intelligence, something like that of a turtle.
|February 27, 2014||Posted by News under Exoplanets, News|
The basic problem seems to be that a planet, even in the habitable zone, can mostly be a gasball with a thick, very high pressure atmosphere that would inhibit life as we know it.
|February 27, 2014||Posted by News under Darwinism, Epigenetics, Intelligent Design, News|
To the Darwinist, it looks like selfish genes (but then everything does). The rest of us would not put that much faith in the gene alone as the unit of inheritance. Separated from the rest of the story, it is probably usually meaningless.
|February 27, 2014||Posted by Cornelius Hunter under Intelligent Design|
Evolutionists like to say that there are mountains of evidence for evolution, but what is the best evidence? What would make a creationist think twice? Twenty five seconds into this video evolutionist Richard Dawkins answers this question. His killer evidence is the congruence between the genes of different plants and animals. Compare the genes across […]
|February 26, 2014||Posted by Barry Arrington under Intelligent Design|
Dear Nick, We’ve had this exchange: Barry Arrington: “If you came across a table on which was set 500 coins (no tossing involved) and all 500 coins displayed the ‘heads’ side of the coin, would you reject ‘chance’ as a hypothesis to explain this particular configuration of coins on a table?” Mark Frank: “. . […]
|February 26, 2014||Posted by News under Cosmology, Intelligent Design, News|
… because a past infinity is impossible?
Prominent science writer insists Darwinian evolution is ongoing, wants to revive “conversation” about race
|February 26, 2014||Posted by News under Culture, Darwinism, Intelligent Design, News|
Not clear why Wade thinks a conversation on the importance of race is “overdue.” Did someone blink and miss a couple of hundred?
|February 26, 2014||Posted by vjtorley under Intelligent Design|
Over at Raw Story, feminist blogger Amanda Marcotte has written an interesting post, New Darwin Documentary Shows Creationists Aren’t Dumb. They’re Fearful, about a new HBO documentary, Questioning Darwin, which features interviews with creationists. Marcotte comments: I agree with the New York Times reviewer that the creationists are presented non-judgementally, but as these clips amassed […]
|February 26, 2014||Posted by scordova under Creationism, News|
embedded by Embedded VideoYouTube Direkt Crowe Tweets Pope Francis and invites him to watch [creationist] movie Now “Noah” star Russell Crowe is trying to reach a higher power, beseeching Pope Francis on Twitter to watch his upcoming biblical adventure, which is based on the Noah’s Ark story from the Book of Genesis. Addressing the pontiff […]
|February 26, 2014||Posted by scordova under Creationism, Intelligent Design, Philosophy, Religion|
It would be an interesting debate as to whether legal decisions by juries are considered science. Does anybody really care whether a jury verdict is called science or non-science? Was the verdict against Jodi Arias for killing Travis Alexander science? Or how about the conviction of Bernie Madoff, is that science? Isn’t it more important […]