Comments on: Dawkins vs. Lennox at the University of Alabama: Get Your Tickets Now

By: Dawkins/Lennox debate - The PuritanBoard

Dawkins/Lennox debate - The PuritanBoard — Tue, 02 Oct 2007 12:31:30 +0000

[...] debate ? Dawkins/Lennox debate Dawkins vs. Lennox at the University of Alabama: Get Your Tickets Now | Uncommon Descent God Delusion Debate to Pit Dawkins Against Christian Apologist John Lennox Debates Noted Atheist [...]

By: Kevin Padian: The Archie Bunker Professor of Paleobiology at Cal Berkeley | Uncommon Descent

Fri, 20 Jul 2007 18:56:02 +0000

[...] John Lennox, who is a mathematician on the faculty of the University of Oxford and is debating Richard Dawkins in October on the topic of whether science has rendered God obsolete (see here for the debate), has this to say about my book NO FREE LUNCH: “In this important work Dembski applies to evolutionary theory the conceptual apparatus of the theory of intelligent design developed in his acclaimed book The Design Inference. He gives a penetrating critical analysis of the current attempt to underpin the neo-Darwinian synthesis by means of mathematics. Using recent information-theoretic Ã¢â‚¬Å“no free lunchÃ¢â‚¬Â theorems, he shows in particular that evolutionary algorithms are by their very nature incapable of generating the complex specified information which lies at the heart of living systems. His results have such profound implications, not only for origin of life research and macroevolutionary theory, but also for the materialistic or naturalistic assumptions that often underlie them, that this book is essential reading for all interested in the leading edge of current thinking on the origin of information.” [...]

By: Quick Hits :: 07.03.07 « Provocations & Pantings

Quick Hits :: 07.03.07 « Provocations & Pantings — Tue, 03 Jul 2007 19:19:27 +0000

[...] * Those in Alabama or near the area might be interested in a debate at the University of Alabama on October 3, 2007. Richard Dawkins will debate John Lennox about “The God Delusion.” (HT :: Uncommon Descent) [...]

By: geoffrobinson

geoffrobinson — Tue, 03 Jul 2007 02:48:51 +0000

I would recommend Bahnsen to skeptic and believer alike.

By: dougcampo

dougcampo — Mon, 02 Jul 2007 20:16:53 +0000

Here is another interesting Berlinski blurp.
————————————
Figures like Daniel Dennett and Richard Dawkins are profoundly embarrassing the scientific establishment, and by that I mean the top biology departments, the editors of Nature and Science, the senior bureaucrats at the NSF and NIH, by going on and on about atheism, selfish genes, evolutionary psychology, stuff that everyone with their heads screwed on tight knows has absolutely nothing to do with any of the serious sciences. And I do mean absolutely, and I do mean nothing. And yet no one much cares. The ACLU is not up in arms about anything these guys say. Put Dawkins on a high school reading list with his claims about being a fulfilled atheist Ã¢â‚¬â€œ thatÃ¢â‚¬â„¢s fine, no problems there. Everyone quite understands that Daniel Dennett is lacking a little in the top story, but he makes the most of his handicap, God Bless. And, again, no one cares what he says.

By: bork

bork — Mon, 02 Jul 2007 20:10:12 +0000

Geoffrobinson:

Even for a skeptic?

By: dougcampo

dougcampo — Mon, 02 Jul 2007 19:51:05 +0000

We will never disprove darwinism and hurl it into the trashcan of history
if we fight among ourselves.

By: dougcampo

dougcampo — Mon, 02 Jul 2007 19:44:23 +0000

“romanist”

For the love of God and everything holy, please no sectarianism.

Thanks.

By: Tedsenough

Tedsenough — Mon, 02 Jul 2007 18:14:38 +0000

MaxAug,

A ‘romanist’?
Oh, you mean a Catholic. If he is, he probably has the beliefs that were in place with the original Church. Go read some Eusebius.

By: geoffrobinson

geoffrobinson — Mon, 02 Jul 2007 18:06:07 +0000

Bahnsen is worth the price of admission.