Category: Self-Org. Theory

Origin of life: Is RNA world overlapping with self-organization theory (because it is otherwise impossible?)

The big question in origin of life is really “Can we wring information from matter — shake the bit out of the it?” Or is it the other way around, as the great physicists would have it: The bit creates the it. But can that happen without an existing intelligence? more

New challenge to Darwinism? Further to “Scientists, shut up and …

It sounds like Louis is trying to conjure the rabbits from the hat with math around variation rather than with selection. It doesn’t work, of course, but it’s a change from the usual. more

(More) Function, the evolution-free gospel of ENCODE

I need a picture of a small, hot-blooded mammal taunting an irritable dinosaur. An animation would be even better: the dinosaur would have a tic which makes him roar ‘IDiot’ constantly. Maybe make that several small mammals, becoming dozens and then hundreds. Singing something witty to the hamster dance. Or maybe not that last bit. […] more

A Designed Object’s Entropy Must Increase for Its Design Complexity to Increase – Part 2

In order for a biological system to have more biological complexity, it often requires a substantial increase in thermodynamic entropy, not a reduction of it, contrary to many intuitions among creationists and IDists. This essay is part II of a series that began with Part 1 The physicist Fred Hoyle famously said: The chance that […] more

A Designed Object’s Entropy Must Increase for Its Design Complexity to Increase – Part 1

The common belief is that adding disorder to a designed object will destroy the design (like a tornado passing through a city, to paraphrase Hoyle). Now if increasing entropy implies increasing disorder, creationists will often reason that “increasing entropy of an object will tend to destroy its design”. This essay will argue mathematically that this […] more

Transport pods inside our cells resemble transformer toys?

“Briggs and colleagues were surprised to find that the COPI building blocks are capable of a ‘transformer’ act: they can change shape to connect to more or fewer copies of themselves.” more

From The Best Schools: James Barham replies to James Shapiro

Leaving Darwinism is simply giving oneself permission to think. And that includes patiently rethinking a number of questions (like the one Barham revisits. more

Non-materialist atheist philosopher James Barham rates an attack at Huffpo

“Natural genetic engineering has not been around forever even if all life as we know it presupposes it.” more

James Barham at Best Schools ‘fesses up #6: Biology will finally become a science on a par with physics when …

… when biologists have the same attitude towards Darwin as physicists have towards Galileo and Kepler. more

From The Best Schools: Seeing Past Darwin II: James A. Shapiro

“Much in our culture depends upon the public’s being made aware that Darwinian theory as standardly interpreted is intellectually bankrupt.” more

Mammalian visual system prompts talk of design, self-organization, in journal

“Our theory of universality in network self-organization explains how they could independently develop a common design.” more

Darwinist attack on self-org theorist James Shapiro: Payback for talking to ID guys?

Hmmm. Shapiro would never describe himself as a proponent of design theory, let alone a “creationist.” more

Memo to Santa Fe Institute: Take the ghost of Darwin out and shoot it. Dawn.

As a matter of fact, either Darwinism or science will survive. Not both. more

From The First Gene: Chapter 8: “Redundant, low-informational selfordering is not organization.”

Unwanted cross-reactions are invariably ignored in these celebrated models. more

Dembski replies to Shapiro: “Natural genetic engineering” is just magic, by another name. Can you make it science?

“For him, natural genetic engineering is a magic phrase, a label, that he attaches to hypothesized processes that are opaque to him and yet that he claims result in evolutionary novelty.” more

Axe and Gauger challenge Shapiro to show that their approach is wrong

“But of course, as experimentalists we are very willing to see the evidence that might prove us wrong.” more

James Shapiro responds to Biologic Institute’s Doug Axe and Ann Gauger

“Proteins evolve largely by shuffling and accreting functional subregions called “domains,” not through the Darwinian modifications of individual amino acids.” more

“Is James Shapiro a Design Theorist?”: James Shapiro Replies to Bill Dembski

“I think it would be a very positive development for ID proponents to give up on all theological crutches … Is Bill Dembski willing to do that?” more

#10 of 2011 for ID community: Limits to self-organization of life identified

“In this respect my argument is similar to, for example, Michael Behe’s argument involving the notion of irreducible complexity (e.g. in Darwin’s Black Box).” more

Memo to markf: Self-organization theory is not a threat to design

There are many non-Darwin theories of evolution out there. None of them do away with the necessity of design. more

Next Page »