A short news article in Molecular Systems Biology is another example of scientists discussing the controversy that doesn’t exist over irreducible complexity. In an article discussing how some molecular biologists increased the selectivity of certain enzymes for their substrates by inducing mutations, they conclude: “Finally, they assumed that the mutations were additive–that the effect on selectivity of combining two mutations could be predicted by adding the effect of each mutation done singly. With this assumption, it was straightforward to predict combinations of single mutations identified as controlling selectivity without decreasing the total productivity. The striking result of this design is that the simple additivity assumption was validated–the authors obtained several triple to quintuple mutants with nearly perfect selectivities for the Read More ›
If as a poll conducted by HDI Research in conjunction with the Finkelstein Institute suggests, 60% of U.S. medical doctors are skeptical of the Darwinian account of human origins, then why not start a dissent list for physicians similar to our dissent list of Ph.D. scientists? Physicians and Surgeons for Scientific Integrity now has, and M.D.s can read about the dissent statement and join the list at www.doctorsdoubtingdarwin.org. To promote the new list, link to it from your website and forward the URL to doctors you know, encouraging them to look at PSSI’s website.
What do you get when you declare intelligent design unconstitutional? You get your photo on the cover of Time Magazine and get called one of the top 100 most influential people! In an article by science writer Matt Ridley (the one who said, “Our minds have been built by selfish genes, but they have been built to be social, trustworthy and cooperative”…except, I might add, for when people aren’t social, trustworthy, or cooperative), he says that Judge Jones “proved to be the answer to Darwinians’ prayers”: “Jones, 50, the grandson of a golf-course developer of Welsh ancestry, whose previous claims to fame were a failed attempt to privatize Pennsylvania’s state liquor stores as chairman of the Liquor Control Board–and banning Read More ›
The new journalistic standard that politically incorrect views do not need to be represented, let alone reported fairly, was on full display on today’s NPR Morning Edition coverage of a teachers convention in California where a class was taught on how to teach evolution. Reporter Gloria Hillard did a fine job of hyping what was, in fact, a small gathering and allowing evolutionist Prof. Ken Miller plenty of time to define the issue of intelligent design.If you want to know the opposition view, go to the Answers in Genesis creationist website for further information on the topic, he suggested. Wasn’t that nice of him? There was no attempt whatever to have a contrary point of view heard. Usually NPR at Read More ›
We like Bruce Ramsey, editorial writer for the Seattle Times, and we often agree with his columns. And we are grateful that the Times sponsored the recent and definitive debate on intelligent design between philosopher of science and geologist Steve Meyer and astrobiologist Peter G. Ward. Ramsey, who attended The Talk of the Times debate at Townhall and is a fan of Ward–he cites Ward’s books in this morning’s column–was wrong, however, in suggesting that Meyer’s formulations are merely “clever”. But don’t take our word for it. WATCH the debate yourself on Thursday at 8 p.m on TVW in the Seattle area and check schedules for other times elsewhere. We hope it will be made available for a downlink later, Read More ›