Misusing Protistan Examples to Propagate Myths About Intelligent Design

The Journal of Eukaryotic Microbiology recently published several papers from a workshop sponsored by the International Society of Protistologists titled “Horizontal Gene Transfer and Phylogenetic Evolution Debunk Intelligent Design.” So here we have a respected scientific society, presumably planning a workshop months in advance, and finally laying out their considered case for why intelligent design fails. As you might imagine, I was most anxious to read about it. Unfortunately, rather than scholarly papers, the manuscripts read like press releases from the National Center for (Darwinian) Science Education. So the introductory essay1 by Avelina Espinosa tells us that ID has “creationist beginnings,” claims that I say “evolution” is “impossible,” and places in my mouth the phrase “design creationism” (I have never Read More ›

Just to Recap

Darwin was wrong. Missing links still missing. There is no such thing as junk DNA. Birds did not descend from Dinosaurs. Irreducible complexity is still irreducibly complex. Tiktaalik has been invalidated by an earlier ancestor. Haeckel’s embryo drawings are still fake (and still in textbooks). Yet, evolution is a fact?

Judge Jones’s Misguided NCSE-Scripted Kitzmiller Ruling and the Origin of New Functional Genetic Information

Links to our 8-Part Series, “The NCSE, Judge Jones, and Citation Bluffs About the Origin of New Functional Genetic Information”: • Part 1 (This Article): Judge Jones’s Misguided NCSE-Scripted Kitzmiller Ruling and the Origin of New Functional Genetic Information • Part 2: The Evolution-Lobby’s Useless Definition of Biological Information • Part 3: The Evolution-Lobby’s Misguided Definition of “New” • Part 4: Finding Darwin in All the Wrong Places • Part 5: How to Play the Gene Evolution Game • Part 6: Asking the Right Questions about the Evolutionary Origin of New Biological Information • Part 7: Assessing the NCSE’s Citation Bluffs on the Evolution of New Genetic Information • Part 8: The NCSE’s Citation Bluffs Reveal Little About the Evolutionary Read More ›

What Darwin Got Wrong: Intelligent Design Proponents Welcome Fodor and Piattelli-Palmarini to the Growing Ranks of Darwin’s Critics

Jerry Fodor and Massimo Piatelli-Palmarini are arrving late to the Darwin doubting party, but are welcome attendees none the less. Below are some welcoming remarks from leading scientific voices in the intelligent design community. We just received a review copy of “What Darwin Got Wrong“, the new book attacking Darwinian evolution by Jerry Fodor and Massimo Piatelli-Palmarini, two thorougly materalistic scientists. Why does that matter? Because typically materialists have been the most ardent defenders of Darwin’s theory of natural selection. With the publication of this book, that is likely to change. For those of you wondering what this is all about let me back up to 2007 when Fodor published his first piece of heresy in the London Review of Read More ›

A Mathematician Looks at Darwin’s Theory and Discovers It Doesn’t Add Up

SEATTLE — “Darwin’s attempt to explain the origins of all the magnificent species in the living world in terms of the struggle for survival is easily the dumbest idea ever taken seriously by science,” writes Dr. Granville Sewell in his new book In the Beginning and Other Essays on Intelligent Design published by Discovery Institute Press. What do you get when you add together the big bang, the fine-tuning of the laws of physics and the evolution of life? Definitely not a materialistic theory of origins, answers Sewell, a Professor of Mathematics at the University of Texas El Paso. In this wide-ranging collection of essays, Sewell concludes that while there is much in the history of life that seems to Read More ›