Tag: Nathan Lents
In His Latest Review of Behe’s Darwin Devolves, Nathan Lents Misses the Forest for the Trees
Evolutionists now increasingly believe that major adaptations are driven by neutral mutations.
Does T-urf13 Refute Irreducible Complexity? A Response to Arthur Hunt
Since 2007, Hunt has been claiming to have refuted Michael Behe’s thesis that irreducible complexity cannot arise by mindless evolutionary processes.
Darwinism, Post-Modernism, and the Summer Seminars
While historically belonging to the pre-modern 19th century, Darwinian evolution teaches what amounts to the deconstruction of what was understood before to be the great design of biology.
Hysteria: Scientists Link Darwin Devolves with Measles Upsurge, Catastrophic Climate Change
Duke University professor Alexander Rosenberg has until now held the prize for the most over-the-top demonizing of the mild-mannered biochemist.
Listen: Behe, McDiarmid Continue a Discussion of the Lents Review
Mike and Andrew have a good time considering the range of ways in which the preemptive, prepublication review fell short.