Response to comments on Science and Creationism

by

I’ve received an interesting comment within a posting here about “Irreducible complexity explained“. It deserves a bit of thought and a carefully considered response, so I thought I’d post my reply here, its too long to be just a comment reply, and may be of interest to others.

The commenter basically raises four points, so I propose to consider each in turn.

1) We have to take a lot on trust from academia. The assertion that peer review indicated acceptability and not necessarily accuracy muddies things.

Peer-reviewers simply consider if a submitted papers claim is supported by the data in it, ensure its appropriate for the journal, and that the study has used proper controls to account for other possible explanations. Its only one small part of the overall process.

Read more

Unleashing change – We can all become skeptics

by

Bill Davidow, a high-technology industry executive and a venture investor, has written an Opinion piece in todays “Christian Science Monitor”. In it he suggests that the Internet will change our physical space in quite a dramatic way … Today, an even bigger change is afoot. The Internet is about to change our physical space. And … Read more

The Christchurch Gay Quake Hoax

by

A website has appeared that has sent portions of the media (and for that matter the blog-sphere) into a feeding frenzy. It claims that Christchurch’s devastating earthquake was an act of God triggered by the tolerance of homosexual behaviour in the city. Sound familiar? perhaps so, because it has a sort of “westboro baptist church” … Read more

Beautiful science

by

The BBC has an Audio slide show you might like to check out. Colourful and visually stunning – but also important in our understanding of scientific advances – the winners of this year’s Wellcome Image Awards range from a close up look at a bloody sticking-plaster, to the striking shades of a ruby-tailed wasp viewed … Read more

Intelligent Design examined – Peer Review

by

There is a thriving sub-culture of folks out there who dismiss evolution and instead promote an alternative known as, “Intelligent Design”. At the forefront of this movement is the Discovery Institute. Often when I hear such claims, I dismiss them with the observation that they have no actual evidence, hence its not science.

As a response to this observation, they have a list of claimed Peer-review articles that are supposed to be credible. The link to the list on their site is here, so lets take a look.

Read more

Exit mobile version