A Mousetrap for Darwin, Adam and Eve, atheists, biochemistry, biologists, chloroquine, City University of New York, Columbia University, Concordia University, critics, Darwin Devolves, Darwinists, Evangelical Christians, Evolution, evolutionists, friendship, Intelligent Design, Joshua Swamidass, Justin Brierley, Kitzmiller v. Dover, mutations, Nathan Lents, op-ed, refutation, Science (journal)
Once again, Darwinists seek to avoid an argument by using clever talk, giving the false impression of a scientist, Behe, who brushes away challenges. Source
A Mousetrap for Darwin, biochemistry, biology, blogs, Complex Carbohydrate Research Center, critics, Darwin's Black Box, Darwinism, Discovery Institute Press, Evolution, Intelligent Design, journals, Michael Behe, natural selection, newspapers, random mutation, Russell W. Carlson, The Edge of Evolution, University of Georgia
"Over the years Behe has received a mountain of criticism, all of which has been answered by him in letters to the editors of journals, newspapers, and blogs." Source
A Mousetrap for Darwin, biological origins, critics, Darwin's Black Box, Darwinism, Evolution, Intelligent Design, Michael Behe, Ray Bohlin, The Natural Limits to Biological Change
Says biologist Raymond Bohlin, the book is a "gift to anyone passionately interested in biological origins and the debate over Darwinism and design." Source
A Mousetrap for Darwin, biochemistry, biologists, critics, data, Eric Anderson, essays, Evolution, ID The Future, Intelligent Design, Irreducible Complexity, Lehigh University, Michael Behe, molecular machines, Science (journal)
The Lehigh University biochemist addresses misconceptions about irreducible complexity, and responds to the claim that “molecular machines” is a misnomer. Source
biology, Bioscience, critics, Darwinists, deformity, disease, Ellen Coombs, Evolution, filmmaker, fossil record, Jackson Wheat, Jerry Coyne, Long Story Short, milk carton kid, Neo-Darwinism, population genetics, poster child, scientists, The Conversation, The Rocks Were There, whales, Wikipedia, YouTube videos
The argument about whales turns on two points: “Population genetics calculations say no,” and “New fossil find throws the series into disarray.” Source
Center for Science & Culture, critics, Evolution, Intelligent Design, Intelligent Design YouTube Festival, movie producers, Signature in the Cell, Stephen Meyer
From June 16-30, we are holding an Intelligent Design YouTube Festival by highlighting 15 Center for Science & Culture YouTube videos that have received more than 100,000 views each. Here is video #6. In addition to producing documentaries and animations, we also post lectures by our scientists and scholars. This is one of the best: Dr. Stephen Meyer speaking to a large live audience about his book Signature in the Cell. If you’d like us to create more videos like this one, please consider becoming one of our “movie producers” by donating to our video production fund. The post Signature in the Cell: Stephen Meyer Faces His Critics appeared first on Evolution News.
automobiles, chance, chassis, critics, design, design detection, differential, doors, explanatory filter, Intelligent Design, Jonathan Waldman, Joshua Swamidass, kinetic theory of heat, necessity, probability, repudiation, retirement, rust, Rust: The Longest War, Sean McDowell, shocks, Uncommon Descent
ID supporters continue to send me emails about Josh Swamidass. The latest hammers on a comment I made in 2008 at Uncommon Descent, namely: “I’ve pretty much dispensed with the EF [Explanatory Filter]. It suggests that chance, necessity, and design are mutually exclusive. They are not. Straight CSI is clearer as a criterion for design detection.” I would not write that now. In my view the filter is just fine and it neither conflates nor falsely differentiates the three modes of explanation (chance, necessity, and design). My comment back then should be seen as an unnecessary concession to critics, not as undercutting the filter per se. To properly use the Explanatory Filter, it is vital to identify what exactly one is trying to explain. Take a rusted automobile. In Jonathan Waldman’s wonderful…
Center for Science & Culture, critics, Dallas Conference on Science & Faith, Daniel Reeves, detective, Discovery Institute, Education, forensics, ID The Future, Intelligent Design, Podcast, straw man, students
On a new episode of ID the Future, Discovery Institute education outreach associate Daniel Reeves illustrates how ID opponents commonly erect mindless straw men versions of the theory of intelligent design, as if by refuting a false version they’ve done any damage to the real thing. Then, in this middle portion of a talk he gave to students at the 2020 Dallas Science and Faith Conference, he explains what ID really is — it’s not unlike detective work — and the central question ID seeks to answer. Download the podcast or listen to it here. Photo credit: BikerNormand from Morsan, France [CC BY-SA 2.0], via Wikimedia Commons. The post Reeves: Getting Intelligent Design Wrong, and Getting It Right appeared first on Evolution News.