Darwin’s checkmate

Darwin’s checkmate is that our minds are merely natural artifacts, shaped for fitness, not for truth,. Thus, Darwinism is true and nothing else is.

Don’t black holes exist? But then what will popular culture do?

Pop culture rants, raves, and peeves have somehow found their expression today as “science.” This stuff doesn’t change; it just acquires science labels.

FTR: Answering ES’ po-mo antics with the semantics of “function”

In recent days, objector ES has been twisting the concept of Wickensian functionally specific information-bearing complex organisation into post-modernist deconstructionist subjectivist pretzels, in order to obfuscate the plain inductive argument at the heart of the design inference and/or explanatory filter. For example, consider these excerpts from the merry go round thread: ES, 41: . . […]

Without Evolution, Life Itself Would Be Impossible

Have you heard the one about the evolutionist who defined life as things that evolve? Evolutionists have never been too humble about their theory. Farmers must be evolutionists to grow their crops. Doctors must be evolutionists to heal their patients. Scientists must be evolutionists to do their research. In fact without evolution, life itself would […]

Multiverse cosmology: Pop science offers loyalty

This mainly shows how much pop science media today depend on anything-goes cosmology to rescue their pet theories.

Public Broadcasting joins the popular demand for a multiverse

This is just the thing to go down well with the PBS audience. Theory rather than evidence.

Pop culture really pushing multiverse

Yes, an astounding claim is stated as a simple fact. But then the typical New Scientist reader probably wouldn’t think of questioning it anyway.

Answering the Who Designed the Designer Objection Yet Again

In my prior post CalvinsBulldog has some interesting questions, which I address here: Calvin, Thank you for your comments. While ID tries to be comfortably agnostic about the designer, orthodox Christians know that the designer is none other than God I would put the case somewhat differently. I would say orthodox Christians “believe” the designer […]

On Holding Utterly Contradictory Ideas in Your Head

Preliminary note. This post focuses on william spearshake again, and readers could be excused for wondering whether I am singling him out. Fair question. The fact is that william is a veritable fount of materialist shibboleths, which he spews with apparently gleeful abandon. In short, he has provided me with a rich vein of materialist […]

The greatest escape in history

Was managed by ordinary human brains

If you ever doubted that popular culture loves the multiverse …

So we need to believe in a multiverse to consider the possible effects of our actions?

Real new knowledge in science comes as a surprise?

A good scientist will initially question its truth, then recognise its value and then will promote its use.

Science Has All Kinds of Non Scientific Influences and Motivations

Philosophers of science well understand that everything from enticements (prestige, publishing, etc.) to threats (tenure, funding, etc.) influence scientists and science, but perhaps no one has said it betterthan Dr. Bruce Charlton:  Read more

WS Wants to Know Why He is Cynical and Uncharitable:  A Tutorial

Update: It occurred to me that people might think this post is intended merely to pick on WS. Not so. The purpose of the post is to demonstrate the principle of charity in philosophy, science and in other areas where ideas compete. WS is a stand-in for every materialist objector to ID who assumes before […]

Jeff Shallit: “Surely the right analogy is Santa Claus to Jesus Christ. Both are mythical figures . . . ” — spectacular Fail at History 101

I just now noticed the above clip by Mr Shallit, who by making such a sophomoric blunder,  thereby disqualifies himself from being taken seriously. I suggest that he spends a bit over an hour with this 101 level video: embedded by Embedded Videovimeo Direkt U/D: GeoffR gives  useful link to a Peter Williams Lecture, also: […]

Jeffrey Shallit: Design Detector

Over at his blog Jeffrey Shallit attacks my two strings of text post. Let’s see what he has to say. “I don’t post [at UD] there because Arrington routinely bans dissent . . .” Correction, I routinely ban trolls, who then claim they were banned for dissenting. I suspect Shallit does not post here, because […]

Darwinian Debating Devices: 2014-09 – Jeffrey Shallit

A week or so ago, Cornelius Hunter referenced a paper by Christoph Adami titled “Information-theoretic considerations concerning the origin of life” available here. Hunter cites the NewScientist article about Adami’s paper, “Chances of first life improved by weighted dice” and highlights in particular the remarkable statement: “Christoph Adami of Michigan State University in East Lansing […]

It’s Not What They Don’t Know That Scares Me

As the old saying goes, it’s not what they don’t know that scares me, but what they know for sure. Nowhere is that more applicable than with evolution asThe Guardian’s Andrew Brown reminds us today when hewrites, “Evolution is actually true.” Don’t blame the messenger, Brown is merely repeating what evolutionists say. And while it […]

Multicellular fossils from 600 mya?

Actually, we might find multicellulars from earlier eras still.

Is design in nature compatible with a multiverse?

It is like asking, is intelligent water compatible with ID? A natural response would be, Is there any intelligent water?

« Previous PageNext Page »