I think it’s the first time I’ve heard a discussion of the second of law thermodynamics on cable TV.
When a militant atheist rampages, we look in vain for reflections from atheist evolutionists.
Like the Darwinian mechanism, the Lamarckian one appears to work — insofar as it does — by knocking things out, not building them up.
Johnson has now come in for criticism from mathematician Jeffrey Shallit and biochemist Larry Moran.
In their critique of William Dembski, Wesley Elsberry and Jeffrey Shallit write, “there is abundant circumstantial evidence that Darwinian processes can account for complexity in nature, but Dembski excludes this evidence because it does not pass his video-camera certainty test.” This badly misrepresents Dembski’s argument. Looking at all the theoretical work Dembski is doing to test the ability of Darwinian processes to generate specified complexity (see his papers at www.evoinfo.org) it should be clear that Dembski is NOT demanding “video-camera certainty” but rather is willing to test the ability of present-day causes to generate high CSI empirically, and theoretically, and then apply his findings to make inferences from the historical record. That’s exactly how historical scientists ought to study these Read More ›