peer-review

red-poppy
Photo: Red poppy, Auckland Botanic Gardens, Auckland, New Zealand, by Sandy Millar via Unsplash.

Breakout Paper in Journal of Theoretical Biology Explicitly Supports Intelligent Design

The Journal of Theoretical Biology has published an explicitly pro-intelligent design article, “Using statistical methods to model the fine-tuning of molecular machines and systems.” Let’s take a closer look at the contents. Read More ›
3D illustration Virus DNA molecule, structure. Concept destroyed code human genome. Damage DNA molecule. Helix consisting particle, dots. DNA destruction due to gene mutation or experiment.
3D illustration Virus DNA molecule, structure. Concept destroyed code human genome. Damage DNA molecule. Helix consisting particle, dots. DNA destruction due to gene mutation or experiment

Selected Journal Articles by Michael Behe

Getting There First: An Evolutionary Rate Advantage for Adaptive Loss-of-Function Mutations Michael J. Behe Biological Information: New Perspectives, edited by R. J. Marks II, M. J. Behe, W. A. Dembski, and B. L. Gordon. World Scientific Publishing, Hong Kong, 450-473. Abstract: Over the course of evolution organisms have adapted to their environments by mutating to gain new functions or to Read More ›

rupert-britton-526882-unsplash
Single red tulip in a field of yellow tulips
Photo by Rupert Britton on Unsplash

Intelligent Design Is Peer-Reviewed, but Is Peer-Review a Requirement of Good Science?

As may be seen from our newly updated page listing Peer-Reviewed & Peer-Edited Scientific Publications Supporting the Theory of Intelligent Design, the ID movement has developed a diverse research program bearing fruit in the form of more than 50 peer-reviewed scientific papers. Beyond doubt, ID proponents have published a significant body of legitimate peer-reviewed research. In the past, critics charged Read More ›

holger-link-744074-unsplash
Model of a molecule
Photo by Holger Link on Unsplash

Experimental Evolution, Loss-of-Function Mutations, and “the First Rule of Adaptive Evolution”

Adaptive evolution can cause a species to gain, lose, or modify a function; therefore, it is of basic interest to determine whether any of these modes dominates the evolutionary process under particular circumstances. Because mutation occurs at the molecular level, it is necessary to examine the molecular changes produced by the underlying mutation in order to assess whether a given adaptation is best considered as a gain, loss, or modification of function. Although that was once impossible, the advance of molecular biology in the past half century has made it feasible. In this paper, I review molecular changes underlying some adaptations, with a particular emphasis on evolutionary experiments with microbes conducted over the past four decades. I show that by far the most common adaptive changes seen in those examples are due to the loss or modification of a pre-existing molecular function, and I discuss the possible reasons for the prominence of such mutations.

Read More ›
Bad poker gamble or unlucky hand concept with player going all in with 2 and 7 (two and seven) offsuit also called unsuited, considered the worst hand in poker preflop (before the flop is revealed)
Bad poker gamble or unlucky hand concept with player going all in with 2 and 7 (two and seven) offsuit also called unsuited, considered the worst hand in poker preflop (before the flop is revealed)

The NCSE, Judge Jones, and Citation Bluffs About the Origin of New Functional Genetic Information

[Editor’s Note: This article is adapted from a series of posts originally posted on Evolution News and Views. The originals may be seen here: Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, Part 4, Part 5, Part 6, Part 7, Part 8.] I. Introduction Not long before the beginning of the 2005 Kitzmiller v. Dover trial, then-National Center for Science Education staff Read More ›

Response to Richard Dawkins

Dear Readers, Here I respond briefly to Richard Dawkins’ review of The Edge of Evolution in the New York Times. I must admit I was surprised that he agreed to do it. In the past Dawkins has said that on principle he would not interact with proponents of intelligent design, because that would give us publicity. I guess when the New York Times offers writing Read More ›