“Even if the multiverse exists, it leaves the deep mysteries of nature unexplained.”
Followers of news from the world of evolution research are abuzz over a new study, and it’s only partly because of the opportunity for putting some mild potty talk in your headlines.
The opening chapter of Epistemology and Science Education: Understanding the Intelligent Design Controversy has zero citations to any ID literature yet managed to conclude that “there are numerous examples of how scientific discourse and practices are perverted by proponents of ‘intelligent design.'”
Molecular genetics professor Robert Saunders was sent an invitation which he accepted, though he didn’t turn up for the event. However he decided to blog about it anyway.
We’ve long enjoyed and admired the important ecumenical journal First Things, founded and still inspired by a great man, the late Fr. Richard John Neuhaus.
In Britain it can be no less dangerous to publicly voice sympathy for ID than it is in the United States.
Is this all it takes to get published by Cambridge University Press these days?
Jack Scanlan, Australian blogger and contributor to Darwinist group blog Panda’s Thumb, picks up on Casey Luskin’s comments here about anti-ID rhetoric and adds an unintentionally humorous suggestion for ID critics.
Earlier this year, Josh Rosenau of the National Center for Science Education (NCSE) apparently felt the need to find a way to deal with the fact that Discovery Institute is funding scientific research that challenges neo-Darwinism.
Richards argues that “Darwinian evolutionary theory held no special place within the community of biologists supportive of National Socialism…and officials in that party utterly rejected Darwinian theory.”