Search results

  1. T

    Intelligent Design is not creationism

    Stu, Your responses to me are getting more and more incoherent. I suspect you are suffering from Darwinian dissonance. I suggest you read the next post.
  2. T

    Intelligent Design is not creationism

    Stu wrote: Do you deny that Darwinists use dysteleology arguments against design? Why are these arguments being invoked if it's not to prove that there is no evidence of purpose in nature?
  3. T

    Intelligent Design is not creationism

    Stu wrote: Most Darwinian scientists think the evolutionary process is devoid of purpose. Here is a sample. Douglas Futuyma in his book Evolutionary Biology says: Monroe W. Strickberger, of the University of Missouri-St. Louis, notes in his widely-used textbook Evolution: The book...
  4. T

    Intelligent Design is not creationism

    Stu wrote: Nonsense. Darwinian evolution is by definition a purposeless process. Cite any leading Darwinst that disputes this. Stu wrote: I didn't say a mud puddle couldn't be designed. I said there is no good reason to think a mud puddle is designed. Stu wrote: Not one word of this...
  5. T

    Intelligent Design is not creationism

    Stu wrote: No. Here is what I said:
  6. T

    Intelligent Design is not creationism

    Busting Another Darwinist Myth: Skeptics of Evolution Do Exist Outside the United States! by Casey Luskin A common Darwinist myth is that the only people who are skeptical of evolution are Americans. A recent article in the Virginia Informer stated, “John Swaddler, UK native and...
  7. T

    Intelligent Design is not creationism

    How misinformation about intelligent design is spread to students and recycled to other anti-ID academics (Part II) by Casey Luskin In Part I of this short response, I explained some false information about intelligent design promoted by George Kampis at East Tennessee State University...
  8. T

    Intelligent Design is not creationism

    How misinformation about intelligent design is spread to students and recycled to other anti-ID academics (Part I) by Casey Luskin Access Research Network has noted a Darwinist's lecture at East Tennessee State University entitled "Intelligent Design Theory and the Poverty of...
  9. T

    Intelligent Design is not creationism

    'There are strong indications of intelligent design' Interview by Nick Jackson Stuart Burgess is Professor of design and nature in the department of mechanical engineering at Bristol University. He argues that intelligent design is as valid a scientific concept as evolution. Current...
  10. T

    Intelligent Design is not creationism

    Iowa State University Denies Tenure to Noted Scientist Who Supports Intelligent Design by John West Iowa State University has denied tenure to astronomer Guillermo Gonzalez, co-author of The Privileged Planet, which presents powerful scientific evidence for the intelligent design of the...
  11. T

    Intelligent Design is not creationism

    Scientists who support intelligent design by Anika Smith One of the more frequent questions people ask about intelligent design is whether any scientists actually support ID theory. There are many notable biologists, biochemists, physicists, and astronomers who support intelligent design...
  12. T

    Intelligent Design is not creationism

    Paul Davies, in his book The Fifth Miracle says: Stu and TraderNik don't see the difference between inferring an "elaborate factory production line" is designed and inferring a mud puddle is designed.
  13. T

    Intelligent Design is not creationism

    The vertebrate eye does not have a compromised design by David Tyler Glial cells have been known to neuroscientists for over a century and they perform numerous essential functions. Now we can add another. In the vertebrate eye, there are "radial glial cells spanning the entire retinal...
  14. T

    Intelligent Design is not creationism

    Stu wrote: Tell that to your buddy Richard Dawkins. He says: He also says: Bruce Alberts, former president of the National Academy of Sciences, once proposed that biologists should think more like engineers and in an article entitled, The Cell as a Collection of Protein Machines, he...
  15. T

    Intelligent Design is not creationism

    Dysteleology arguments assume what they are trying to disprove. Nobody would make these kinds of "poor design" arguments about a mud puddle since it doesn't seem designed in the first place. Something has to have been made for a purpose before it makes any sense to look at it and declare that...
  16. T

    Intelligent Design is not creationism

    TraderNik wrote: Hardly. There have been 3,000 views of this thread in the last couple of days, leaving all the rest in the dust. TraderNik wrote: Here is an article by an ID theorist. I challenge the ID critics to find any reference to the supernatural, any reference to religious...
  17. T

    Israeli researchers: ‘Lucy’ is not direct ancestor of humans

    Israeli researchers: ‘Lucy’ is not direct ancestor of humans By JUDY SIEGEL-ITZKOVICH Tel Aviv University anthropologists say they have disproven the theory that “Lucy” - the world-famous 3.2-million-year-old Australopithecus afarensis skeleton found in Ethiopia 33 years ago - is...
  18. T

    Intelligent Design is not creationism

    University of Missouri Doctor Lectures on Design By Logan Gage It looks like CSC contributor Michael Egnor is not the only professor of medicine to stick his neck out for intelligent design and face severe personal attack. Dr. John Marshall of The University of Missouri–Columbia...
  19. T

    Intelligent Design is not creationism

    What Exactly Does Genetic Similarity Demonstrate? By Logan Gage Francix X. Clines, an excellent writer for The City Life and Editorial Observer sections of The New York Times, today (April 23, 2007) repeats what may be the most common mistake in trying to sell Darwinism to the public...
  20. T

    Intelligent Design is not creationism

    What role did the inference to design play for scientists who gave us electricity? By Michael Egnor Mike Lemonick, Time Magazine’s senior science writer and credulous Darwinist, has a habit of writing things that make even his Darwinist friends cringe. He recently posted an essay...
Back
Top