One of the things I have been critical of concerning the Intelligent Design movement was it’s lack of peer-reviewed papers. It was with great interest, therefore, when I saw an announcement of a new peer-reviewed paper co-authored by William Dembski: Montañez G, Ewert W, Dembski WA, Marks II RJ (2010) A vivisection of the ev computer . . . → Read More: Recent Peer-Reviewed ID Paper
A recent poll of ASA members showed some interesting results.
1. 73% of Christian professionals in the sciences affirmed the following: “Plants and animals developed through evolutionary processes” (with natural and/or non-natural causes from ancestral forms)
2. 60% affirmed “Plants and animals developed through evolutionary processes with natural causes from ancestral forms.”
3. 61% affirmed “Biologically, Homo Sapiens evolved . . . → Read More: Hamilton’s Rule
Political polling wunderkind, Nate Silver, has done it again. First he saw how Strategic Vision was making up polling data and now his low rating of Research 2000 has lead to a lawsuit of R2K by the Daily Kos for fraud. I would like to look at how the alleged fraud was detected. Namely, physical phenomena . . . → Read More: Randomness, Political Polling, and Intelligent Design
I read this over on UcD:
One can argue that as an empirical matter ID has failed to demonstrate that living things bear indicia of design. Many scientists would disagree, but competing interpretations of the data are what good science is all about. May the best interpretation prevail. But some scientists go further than advancing competing interpretations . . . → Read More: ID not science, should it be called Natural Philosophy?
An Origins Parable
Over the years, there has been a great deal of blood spilled, or at least ink spilled, over the creation science and origins debates. What follows is an “intelligently designed” attempt to illustrate the differences between various positions on origins, using a somewhat humorous but generally accurate parable. This is presented . . . → Read More: Godless Embryologists
On Monday, January 25, Eugenie Scott of the National Center for Biology Education (NCBE) spoke at CSU (promo blurb). A panel discussion followed on the state of science education with Dr. Scott, some CSU profs, and some local science teachers participating. I also had the opportunity to have breakfast with Dr. Scott the following morning. Here . . . → Read More: Eugenie Scott at Colorado State University
I thought this was an interesting post from UcD.
Many, many people seem to misunderstand the relationship between Intelligent Design and Common Descent. Some view ID as being equivalent to Progressive Creationism (sometimes called Old-Earth Creationism), others seeing it as being equivalent to Young-Earth Creationism. I have argued before that the core of ID is not about a . . . → Read More: ID and Common Descent @ UcD
A pointer to the comments that Randy Isaac is posting.
Historical Causal Analysis
The Argument from Intelligence
Signature in . . . → Read More: Discussion of Signature in the Cell