Cambrian explosion

Photo by Tadeusz Lakota

Barking Up the Wrong Tree

Upon learning of an employee’s defection to a rival company, one prominent CEO launched a chair across the room. Commenting on the incident in the Washington Post, eminent primatologist Frans de Waal noted that the CEO acted like an ape. But de Waal (and the Post for that matter) wasn’t kidding; he took this incident as further proof of common Read More ›

Monkeys gazing at each other
Monkeys gazing at each other
Photo by Sophie Dale at Unsplash

The Politically Incorrect Guide to Darwinism and Intelligent Design

If you want a book full of fascinating anecdotes and straight-talk about the debate over Darwinism and intelligent design, written by a credentialed biologist with enjoyable writing skills, this truly is the book for you. Read More ›

ISCID Chat With Paul Nelson

ISCID Moderator:Our guest speaker today is Paul Nelson. Dr. Nelson is a philosopher of biology, specializing in evo-devo and developmental biology. He is also a fellow of the International Society for Complexity, Information and Design. Dr. Nelson received his Ph.D. from the University of Chicago Department of Philosophy. His thesis critiques aspects of macroevolutionary theory in light of recent developments Read More ›

students-in-science-class-stockpack-adobe-stock.jpg
Students In Science Class
Licensed from Adobe Stock

Darwin in the Classroom

After months of debate, the Ohio State Board of Education unanimously adopted science standards on Dec. 10 that require Ohio students to know “how scientists continue to investigate and critically analyze aspects of evolutionary theory.” Ohio thus becomes the first state to mandate that students learn not only scientific evidence that supports Darwin’s theory but also scientific evidence critical of Read More ›

Intelligent Design Could Offer Fresh Ideas on Evolution

There is a growing public debate over how best to teach evolution in America’s schools. But contrary to Alan Leshner (” ‘Intelligent design’ theory threatens science classrooms,” Nov. 22), that debate is not focused on requiring students to learn the theory of intelligent design. Neither the Cobb County School Board in Georgia nor the Ohio State Board of Education mentioned Read More ›

merry-go-round-christmas-lights-background-stockpack-adobe-stock.jpg
Merry go round Christmas lights background
Licensed from Adobe Stock

There You Go Again

The believers in Darwinian evolution who currently dominate our educational establishment think that all students — even those headed for careers in auto mechanics or real estate — should believe, as they do, that all of us are descended from ape-like creatures through genetic accidents and survival of the fittest. Promoters of this doctrine have recently been urging the Ohio State Read More ›

fossils-in-rock-stockpack-adobe-stock.jpg
Fossils in rock
Licensed from Adobe Stock

The Cambrian Explosion

Both Charles Darwin himself and contemporary neo-Darwinists such as Francisco Ayala, Richard Dawkins, and Richard Lewontin acknowledge that biological organisms appear to have been designed by an intelligence. Yet classical Darwinists and contemporary Darwinists alike have argued that what Francisco Ayala calls the “obvious design” of living things is only apparent. As Ayala, a former president of the American Association for the Advancement of Science, has explained: “The functional design of organisms and their features would therefore seem to argue for the existence of a designer. It was Darwin’s greatest accomplishment to show that the directive organization of living beings can be explained as the result of a natural process, natural selection, without any need to resort to a Creator or other external agent.”

According to Darwin and his contemporary followers, the mechanism of natural selection acting on random variation is sufficient to explain the origin of those features of life that once seemed to require explanation by reference to an intelligent or purposeful designer. Thus, according to Darwinists, the design hypothesis now represents an unnecessary and un-parsimonious explanation for the complexity and apparent design of living organisms. On these as well as methodological grounds contemporary biologists have generally excluded the design hypothesis from consideration as an explanation for the origin of biological form.

Read More ›

“E” is for evolution; “F” is for Fordham

We count on scientists to tell us what they know and do not know–not just what they want us to hear. But when it comes to the origin and evolution of life on earth, spokesmen for official science–and science education–have been far less forthcoming than we might wish. When writing in scientific journals, leading biologists candidly discuss many scientific difficulties Read More ›