Tag: tinkering
Why Their Separate Ancestry Model Is “Wildly Unrealistic”
On Monday, I will look at the consistency of the phylogenetically informative sites for the Baum et al. (2016) paper. Spoiler alert: It looks like design.
Walking Wonder: More to Appreciate About Kinesin, the “Workhorse of the Cell”
In our video, this molecular motor appears to walk slowly and deliberately, but remember: the narrator says it can take a hundred steps a second.
For Dreams of Darwinian Evolution, First Rule of Adaptive Evolution Is an Insuperable Problem
Professor Lenski’s contrasting of the frequency versus importance of evolutionary changes is misconceived and his illustrations are inapt.
Intelligent Design and the Artist’s Soul (Part 3)
Editor’s Note: This is crossposted at Professor Scot McKnight’s Beliefnet blog, Jesus Creed. The first post in this series is found here, and the second here. The Origin of Beauty Benjamin Wiker and Jonathan Witt’s masterful book A Meaningful World: How the Arts and Sciences Reveal the Genius of Nature gives the following illustration of how modern scientific reductionists treat nature and the arts: Imagine hearing the following account of one of Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart’s symphonies: ‘We have been able to prove that this particular symphony is actually reducible to a series of notes that happen to be played both at the same time in chords and one after another, creating a string of disturbances in the air caused by Read More ›
Intelligent Design and the Artist’s Soul (Part 2)
Editor’s Note: This is crossposted at Professor Scot McKnight’s Beliefnet blog, Jesus Creed. The first post in this series is found here. Intelligent Design and the Deity In the predominant narrative, Charles Darwin was a humble scientist who proposed a strictly scientific theory. Upon publication of The Origin of Species in 1859, religious folks like Bishop Wilberforce voiced theological objections to it; and thus began the most salient episode in the ‘war between science and religion.’ Many Christians adopt a similar narrative, but suggest this was all a misunderstanding; Darwin’s theory simply has nothing to do with religious or philosophical questions. If I may be so bold, I’d like to suggest that both narratives are wrong.