Category Archives

Archive of posts published in the category: Intelligent Design

Junk Darwinism Not Junk DNA

An integrated encyclopedia of DNA elements in the human genome This is just one of many scientific papers that have come out as a result of the ENCODE (Encyclopedia of DNA Elements) project discovering functions in the “non-coding” region of human DNA. ID…

Darwin’s Dilemma

I am looking forward to watching Darwin’s Dilemma.

Its All About the Evidence…Evidently!

In many discussions across the blogoshere about the existence of God or supernatural entities, the claim is often made that there’s no reason to think that such things exist because there simply is “no evidence”. Those who do think such entities exist are…

Methodological Naturalism: Is it Necessary for Science?

I’ve recently had the “privilege” of discussing some of the implications of so-called methodological naturalism (MN) on one or two blogs. For Darwinists, especially Darwinists who take philosophical naturalism (PN) as true, MN is an absolute necessity for scientific practice. Thus MN becomes…

Atheist Bigots Abound

While not every Darwinist is an atheist, just about every atheist is a Darwinist. So don’t tell me that there is no connection between ID, Darwinism and Atheism. Thank you to EN&V for bringing this bigotry to our attention and another demonstration of…

Intellectually Fulfilled Theism

Isn’t it interesting that 19th century (the great “death of God” era) Darwinian “science” made it possible for Dawkins to become an intellectually fulfilled atheist, but that late 20th century science has made faith and theism more rational and reasonable than ever before…

ID, Darwinism, and Divine/Fallen Human Uniqueness

Dear Teleological Folks, I posted the following over at UncommonDescent.com but it is undoubtedly long lost in the comments. I thought it might be of interest here. As some of you may know, I used to be a militant, Dawkins-style atheist. All that…

Philosophy First Science

Sal’s recent OP about setting up a YC discussion blog got me thinking about the influence and role that philosophical presuppositions play in how one views science and scientific findings, or even in how one defines what science is. As I follow discussion…

Hydroplate theory anybody?

This thread has changed from the original title and the OP deleted due to the nature of the comments.

Intelligent design is a science, not a faith

A great article from the UK supporting ID. Buggs, who holds a DPhil in plant ecology and evolution from the University of Oxford and sits on the scientific panel of Truth in Science, Finally, Randerson claims that ID is “pure religion”. In fact,…