Darwinian Debating Devices # 12: Selective Hyperskepticism, closed-mindedness (and “extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence”)

Perhaps the most deep-rooted Darwinist debate tactic is hyperskepticism. While I have done a briefing note on this, I like HeKS’ nice summary raised a little while back, in an Oct 9th 2014  remark that deserves to be headlined: Normal skepticism is generally equitable and a good thing. It applies a reasonably consistent demand for […]

No reptiles any more?

Dunno. Local grass snakes keep insisting that reptiles exist—as long as they can get below the frost line over winter, through cavities in the Shield.

Snarls over epigenetics

If The Scientist isn’t hanging the epigenetics people out to dry (wouldn’t they just love to?), they suspect their research is valid.

One of the four horsemen of the atheist apocalypse sort of thinks there is free will

More evidence for new atheist movement coming apart at the seams?

Darwinian Debating Devices #11: “The Straw Man”

Update: We are republishing this post under the Darwinian Debating Devices series The Straw Man tactic is especially reprehensible, because it is fundamentally dishonest. Wikipedia describes the tactic as follows A straw man is a common type of argument and is an informal fallacy based on the misrepresentation of an opponent’s argument. To be successful, […]

Darwinian Debating Devices #10: “The Double Standard”

Update: Republished as part of the Darwinian Debating Devices series. In this post Dr. Torley engages in a philosophical discussion about the nature of God. In the comment thread we have Graham2 saying: This site lost any claim to the practice of impartial science long long ago. And william spearshake says: UD, which purports to […]

Darwinian Debating Devices #9: “The Humpty Dumpty Gambit”

Humpty

ID proponents have investigated Darwinian processes thoroughly and found that they cause minor variations, not the major changes Darwinists claim.

Nobody ever calls it “Darwinism” today!

No? Then how come…

Darwinian Debating Devices, # 8: refusing to acknowledge the reality of FSCO/I and its reliably known, characteristic cause

Let us follow an example being discussed in UD comment threads in recent days, of comparing two piles of “dirt”. (U/D, I add — on advice, a sample from ES, as a PS.) CASE A: The volcanic dome of Montserrat’s Soufriere Hills Volcano, a few miles south of where I am composing this post . […]

New at MercatorNet

Can massive databases reveal a whole new set of truths?

Tip from friend: Open Access Week at Royal Society Journals October 20-25

Here. “During this week all Royal Society content will be completely free to access.” It’s going on in lots of other places too, so check. Open access is becoming a cause, and there are many issues to untangle. We sure hope so. For example, recently, one could have read Max Tegmark’s paper on consciousness as […]

Sam Harris on why consciousness does not feel like a self

If only that were true. If only one could wish one’s toothache to belong to some utter non-self vanishing into a mist somewhere. Now, that’d be the day.

A Princeton prof attempts to explain consciousness. Hush, we may be hearing answers now.

So there you have it, we have consciousness but only about stuff that is wrong.

Darwinian Debating Devices # 7: “Definition Deficit Disorder”

Update: Republished as part of the Darwinian Debating Devices series. Thank you to all who contributed to my recent request for comments. There were many excellent comments, and I have attempted to synthesize them into a WAC. (BTW, I like WJM’s name for the syndrome better than my own and have switched to it). Here […]

Darwinist Debating Devices #6: “The Literature Bluff”

Update: I am republishing this to add it to the “Darwinian Debating Devices” category. In this post Dr. Hunter shows us professor of English Terry Scambray completely destroying three Ph.D Darwinists on basic logic and reasoning.    Jeffrey Shallit takes to his website to rebut Professor Scambray’s arguments and falls flat on his face.  First Shallit […]

Darwinian Debating Devices #5: The False Quote Mining Charge

UPDATE: UD has started a new “Darwinian Debating Devices” category. I am re-publishing this post to add it to the category. One of the Darwinists’ favorite tactics is the “False Quote Mining Charge.” For those who do not know what “quote mining” is: Quote mining is the deceitful tactic of taking quotes out of context […]

But what difference, at this point, does it make if Tyson fabricates quotes?

In a post-modern environment, people can say whatever and compel others to accept it because that is the closest substitute for truth for a nihilistic society.

The importance of the fact that Darwinism is a story

Darwinism’s demise would leave too great a hole in many lives to be contemplated. So it never is. No matter what.

New York Times recounts when racism was a science

Decorously leaving out the main reason why: Darwinism

Epigenetics: Embryos receive parent-specific layers of information, study shows

Let’s pause a moment to remember all the people who were ridiculed by Darwin’s “aren’t I good?” girls for thinking that something like this might be true.

« Previous PageNext Page »