Tag: George Gilder
See Human Zoos in Las Vegas at FreedomFest!
It’s not, how shall I say this, an audience guaranteed to be sympathetic to a critique of Darwinism and its social impact, even one as thoroughly researched and accurately told as this.
Study the Vision of George Gilder in a Seminar Setting, July 26-29 in Seattle
Countering “flat universe theory” is Gilder’s enterprise, and it captures much of what we do at Discovery Institute.
Leap Before You Look: Reflections on the Mission and “Evolution” of Discovery Institute
I helped form Discovery Institute 25 years ago and over that period, if I may use the term, it has evolved.
Derbyshire Attacks Gilder Part III: Praising Judge Jones while Pretending To Not Praise George Gilder
Maybe the most fascinating part of Derbyshire’s article is the candor with which he evaluates the strength of Gilder’s arguments. Derbyshire states clearly that “[Gilder’s metaphysic] refutes evolution, which has high-information-bearing substrates arising out of low-information-bearing ones… [and] As metaphysics go, [Gilder’s is] a pretty good schema… a good metaphysic for our age…” Thus it seems that Derbyshire affirms one of Gilder’s central points! In an attempt to not sell the entire farm, Derbyshire assures his fellow naturalists that we are “getting along just fine… discovering new things about the world, pushing the wheel of knowledge forward a few inches every year.” But Darwinist biologist Franklin M. Harold wrote that while “[w]e should reject, as a matter of principle, the Read More ›
Derbyshire Attacks Gilder Part II: Overblown Claims for Evolution
By Joe Manzari and Casey Luskin John Derbyshire claims that modern biology is built on evolution. He says that “Creationists seem not to be aware of how central evolution is to modern biology. Without it, nothing makes sense… Speciation via evolution underpins all of modern biology, both pure and applied.” However, in 2001, A.S. Wilkins, editor of the journal BioEssays, made it clear that “evolution would appear to be the indispensable unifying idea and, at the same time, a highly superfluous one.” Apparently Derbyshire sees things differently from Wilkins, claiming that evolution is vital for “such things as new cures for diseases and genetic defects, new crops.” Yet Wilkins’ sentiment was re-affirmed in 2005 by Philip Skell, a member of Read More ›