Top Chemist: “They Just Stare at Me”

Yesterday James Tour, who in 2009 was ranked one of the top 10 chemists in the world, explained that evolutionists do not understand how evolution could have created life. What’s worse, Tour explains that there is a lack of clarity about this scientific fact. In public, evolutionists insist evolution is a fact beyond all reasonable doubt. But […]

Continued push for consciousness as a fourth state of matter

Would we give up naturalism to solve the hard problem of consciousness? Trade the clunk for the question?

Stasis: Lamprey larvae from 125 mya, “Our larvae look modern”

Researcher: “… lampreys haven’t changed much—and that’s very interesting.

Is something rotten in the state of Denmark?

Denmark and Sweden are two countries which are often cited by atheists as proof that secular morality can work. Professor Jerry Coyne, for instance, has written dozens of articles praising Denmark (see here for instance, and see also here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here and here). At the end of one […]

Shoutout to Tom English: How much of the animus you display against Marks and Dembski is scholarly?

One hopes that further critical review of Marks and Dembski’s papers focuses on the issues at hand.

Biophysics, not Darwinism, explains ammonite shell shape

Researchers: … this theoretical [biophysics] approach explains the diversity existing within and between species.

Would we give up naturalism to solve the hard problem of consciousness?

Today, irrespective of the state of the evidence, actual or perceived naturalism distinguishes the genius from the fool.

Sam Harris on defamation

One can demand moral accountability only if one believes that the universe is fundamentally moral, and Harris explicitly does not believe that.

Reasonable Faith on the fine-tuning of the universe

Useful refresher in the age of worry over Boltzmann brains

The High God of Random strikes at hazard

Sometimes gets lucky.

New atheism: Jerry Coyne on John Gray on Richard Dawkins

Coyne: One might as well speculate that Gray simply has an overwhelming hatred for atheists

PBS: Flood of new drugs from human genome map “unmitigated failure”

Because the genome is only a parts list. But there’s hope.

Sean Carroll explains why physicists worry about Boltzmann brains

Readers? If this is what cosmology has come to, what do you recommend?

Philosopher Brian Leiter to step down from philosophy program ranking post

620 philosophers refused to contribute as volunteers if he remained.

Traditional UK media accepted baseless allegations against animal research labs

If such media print unfounded allegations of wrong-doing against others, we can of course expect them to do it to us as well.

Darwinian Debating Devices #4: “Desperate Distractions”

Darwinists frequently employ the debating device that I call “Desperate Distractions.” This occurs when the Darwinist has lost the debate beyond any hope, and instead of admitting they have lost, the Darwinist continues to throw mud at the wall to see if anything will stick. Apparently, their determination never to cede a micro-millimeter impels them […]

Cave paintings (stencils) found in Indonesia from approx 40 kya prompt new approach to origin of artwork

They turned out to be much older than anyone expected, contemporary with European cave paintings.

Missing the Point at The “Skeptical” Zone

Over at The “Skeptical” Zone they continue to be skeptical about literally everything; everything that is except the unquestioned verities of the scientific and cultural establishment. As I periodically do, I made a run though their last few months’ of postings. The denizens of the Zone are if nothing else impressive in their consistency. As […]

Darwinian Debating Devices #3: Moving Goalposts

One of the Darwinists’ favorite tricks is known as “moving the goalpost.” The essence of this trick is deflecting away from having been defeated in a debate by pretending the debate was about something else. Thus, if the ID proponent meets a Darwinist’s challenge with respect to issue X, the Darwinist will pretend the issue […]

More pushback against evolutionary biology’s takeover by nonsense?

The problem isn’t that it is imperialistic but that so few of these forays are supported by science, as traditionally understood.

« Previous PageNext Page »