Category: Design inference

Thinking Upside Down – The Abiogenesis Paradigm

Not too many months ago I ran across Richard Dawkins’ statement that life got its start when, somehow, on the early Earth a self-replicating molecule formed.  I nearly fell out of my chair laughing.  I had read the quote before, and he has repeated the idea in various writings and interviews, but after having studied […] more

“In the Beginning Were the Particles” – Thoughts on Abiogenesis

Recently we have been discussing Dr. Sewell’s thermodynamics-related paper/video on this thread.  In addition to some excellent discussion on the Second Law, the question of abiogenesis has naturally arisen.  Though related to the Second Law issue (by way of the compensation argument), I would like to move discussion of the abiogenesis question to this new […] more

ID Basics – Information – Part II – When Does Information Arise?

In my first post I discussed the concept of information, in particular whether information is contained in a physical object by its mere existence.  In this post I would like to consider an additional issue relating to information, namely, the point at which information arises or comes into existence. Information is often closely associated with […] more

Intelligent Design Basics – Information

First of all I want to thank the Uncommon Descent moderators for allowing me to post, with a particular hat tip to StephenB.  As I indicated on a prior thread, I am not sure how often I will take the time to create a new thread, but hopefully I can occasionally post something of interest.  […] more

Making common cause with non-materialist atheists

Finally, at Nagel’s urging, Dembski followed up on Hawthorne and Nolan, and realized that they aren’t just more synchro handwavers; they have something to offer. more

ID Foundations, 22: What about evolutionary trees of descent and homologies? (An answer to Jaceli123′s presentation of a typical icon of evolution . . . )

As has been noted, sometimes people come to UD looking for answers to questions about what they have been taught regarding “Evolution”; typically in the context of indoctrination under the Lewontinian ideological a priori materialism that he outlined thusly in his infamous 1997 NYRB article: [T]he problem is to get [the general public] to reject […] more

“I’ve grown accustomed to your face . . . ” — headlining a comment by ayearningforpublius to pose the question of origin of a significant case of FSCO/I . . . functionally specific, complex organization and/or associated information

New UD commenter ayearningforpublius has put up a comment on the implications of facial recognition, several times. I think it significant enough as a case of FSCO/I and the challenge of addressing its origin, to headline it. But first, let’s put up the vid clip he links: embedded by Embedded VideoYouTube Direkt Now, his remarks: […] more

ID Foundations, 21: MF — “as a materialist I believe intelligence to be a blend of the determined and random so for me that is not a third type of explanation” . . . a root worldview assumption based cause for rejecting the design inference emerges into plain view

In the OK thread, in comment 50, ID objector Mark Frank has finally laid out the root of ever so many of the objections to the design inference filter. Unsurprisingly, it is a worldview based controlling a priori of materialism: [re EA] #38 [MF, in 50:] I see “chance” as usually meaning to “unpredictable” or […] more

ID Foundations, 20: Caught between the Moon and New York City . . . the Privileged Planet thesis

Yesterday, News put up a post on the mysterious origins of the moon, invoking a classic song on being caught between the Moon and New York City. (Niwrad added a post here on the multiverse that is also worth seeing. Kindly bear in mind this earlier ID Foundations post on fine tuning.) Mahuna aptly comments: […] more

Debating Darwin and Design: Science or Creationism? (8) – Francis Smallwood’s Fourth Response

My neo-Darwinian friend, Francis Smallwood, has now written a response to my previous instalment in our dialogue. If you want to read it, go here. Below is a small excerpt of the response by Francis. You can read his full response by going to his blog. Follow the link at the bottom of the page. […] more

Is the design inference fatally flawed because our uniform, repeated experience shows that a designing mind is based on or requires a brain?

In recent days, this has been a hotly debated topic here at UD, raised by RDFish (aka AI Guy). His key contention is perhaps best summarised from his remarks at 422 in the first understand us thread: we do know that the human brain is a fantastically complex mechanism. We also know that in our […] more

Out of the mouths of infants

A sample for you of one of the products of unguided, undesigned, blind forces, working together for the survival of genes, with no objective meaning or purpose: Can we get a meme going here? If you’ve got a blog/Facebook/Twitter etc., then post your example! more

Infographic: The science of ID

HT, ENV. Let’s Embed, from here:   Explore more infographics like this one on the web’s largest information design community – Visually.   And, let us discuss. END more

Could everything life needed to get started been coded in at the Big Bang?

Wouldn’t it be sort of like all the dominoes set up, and then someone just gives them a push? more

Tom Wolfe at Socrates lecture where Steve Meyer spoke?

Her article identifies “growing subterranean dissent” from Darwinism. Sure, but Tom “Bonfire of the Vanities” Wolfe’s dissent isn’t exactly subterranean. He has said openly (2005), … more

Can DNA built structures evidence intelligence?

How do we distinguish systems formed by natural laws, from stochastic processes, and from systems designed by intelligent agents? See Demski’s Explanatory Filter at ARN and at the IDEA Center. Now at Harvard’s Molecular Systems Lab, Peng Yin is currently focused on engineering programmable molecular systems that are inspired by biology, such as the information-directed, self-assembly […] more

Biological argument for God from design more compelling than cosmological one?

The thing about arguments from design, whether biologial or cosmological, is that, because the design is evident, most counterarguments are irrational. more

Peer review: Another citation stacking scheme outed

Why does no one believe the basic messages of Darwinism when push comes to shove? Why does everyone believe in design at that point? more

A doctor who is a secular humanist talks about the “design” of the kidney

… and talks like an ID theorist. more

Pastafarians can now claim religious persecution

The Pastas say they don’t take themselves seriously. In these times, alas, it may not be in their hands: more

Next Page »