DOCSLIB.ORG

Darwin's Doubt

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Darwin's Doubt Debating Darwin’s Doubt A Scientific Controversy that Can No Longer Be Denied DAVID KLINGHOFFER, EDITOR DISCOVERY INSTITUTE PRESS SEATTLE 2015 Description This book contains essays responding to criticism of Darwin’s Doubt: The Explosive Origin of Animal Life and the Case for Intelligent Design by Stephen Meyer. The book explores topics such as orphan genes, cladistics, small shelly fossils, protein evolution, the length of the Cambrian explosion, the God-of-the-Gaps objection to intelligent design, and criticisms raised by proponents of theistic evolution. Contributors include Stephen Meyer, Douglas Axe, David Berlinski, William Dembski, Ann Gauger, Casey Luskin, and Paul Nelson. Edited by David Klinghoffer. Copyright Notice Copyright © 2015 by Discovery Institute. All Rights Reserved. Publisher’s Note This book is part of a series published by the Center for Science & Culture at Discovery Institute in Seattle. Previous books include Signature of Controversy: Responses to CritiCs of Signature in the Cell, edited by David Klinghoffer; The Myth of Junk DNA by Jonathan Wells; The Deniable Darwin & Other Essays by David Berlinski; and DisCovering Intelligent Design: A Journey into the SCientifiC EvidenCe by Gary Kemper, Hallie Kemper, and Casey Luskin. Library Cataloging Data Debating Darwin’s Doubt: A SCientifiC Controversy that Can No Longer Be Denied Edited by David Klinghoffer. BISAC Subject: SCI027000 SCIENCE / Life Sciences / Evolution BISAC Subject: SCI080000 SCIENCE / Essays BISAC Subject: SCI034000 SCIENCE / History ISBN-13: 978-1-936599-30-1 (Kindle) 978-1-936599-31-8 (EPUB) 978-1-936599-28-8 (paperback) Publisher Information Discovery Institute Press, 208 Columbia Street, Seattle, WA 98101 Internet: http://www.discoveryinstitutepress.com/ First Edition. July 2015. Contents Introduction: No Debate over Darwinian Evolution? David Klinghoffer . .9 I. Pre-Publication Debate & Discussion 1. Darwinists Waste No Time William Dembski . 17. 2. Gripe-Fest Turns Surreal David Klinghoffer . .23 II. Speed Reader: Nick Matzke 3. Rush to Judgment Casey Luskin . .27 4. Matzke, Cladistics, and Missing Ancestors Stephen C . Meyer . .42 5. A Graduate Student Writes David Berlinski . .71 6. How “Sudden” Was the Cambrian Explosion? Casey Luskin . .75 7. A One-Man Clade David Berlinski . .89 8. Hopeless Matzke David Berlinski & Tyler Hampton . 10. 0 9. Cladistics to the Rescue? Casey Luskin . .115 III. Heavyweight: Berkeley’s Charles Marshall 10. When Theory Trumps Observation Stephen C . Meyer . .129 11. No New Genetic Information Needed? Stephen C . Meyer . .133 12. The God-of-the-Gaps Fallacy? Stephen C . Meyer . .142 13. Small Shelly Fossils and the Cambrian Explosion Casey Luskin . .150 14. More on Small Shelly Fossils and the Cambrian Explosion Stephen C . Meyer . .156 IV. Biologist: Martin Poenie 15. Answering Objections from Martin Poenie Douglas Axe . 16. 3 16. More on Objections from Martin Poenie Douglas Axe . .167 17. Orphan Genes: A Guide for the Perplexed Ann Gauger . .173 18. Protein Evolution: A Guide for the Perplexed Ann Gauger . .177 19. Show Me: A Challenge for Martin Poenie Douglas Axe . 18. 2 V. Miscellaneous Challenges 20. Backhanded Compliments from The New Yorker David Klinghoffer . .187 21. About an Ellipsis: John Farrell in National Review David Klinghoffer . .191 22. Darwin Defenders Love Donald Prothero’s Amazon Review Casey Luskin . .194 23. Does the “Great Unconformity” Explain Missing Ancestors? Casey Luskin . .202 VI. Trends in Reviewing Darwin’s Doubt 24. Evidence of Short-Term Memory Loss David Klinghoffer . .209 25. Reviewing the Reviewers: A Taxonomy of Evasion David Klinghoffer . .213 26. Hostile Responses Change a Thoughtful Reader Casey Luskin . .218 VII. Replying to Darwin’s Doubt Without Naming It 27. Cambrian Animals? Just Add Oxygen Evolution News & Views . 2. 25 28. Teamwork: New York Times and Science Offer a Rebuttal Casey Luskin . .230 29. To Create Cambrian Animals, Whack the Earth from Space Evolution News & Views . 2. 36 30. Does Lightning-Fast Evolution Solve the Cambrian Enigma? Stephen C . Meyer . .241 VIII. Responses from Theistic Evolutionists 31. Finding the Designer’s Garbage Casey Luskin . .251 32. BioLogos Delivers a Raft of Reviews David Klinghoffer . .258 33. Ralph Stearley’s “Well, Maybe, Who Knows?” Review Paul Nelson . .262 34. Still Awaiting Engagement Paul Nelson . .267 35. Are Biologists Coming to Reject Neo-Darwinian Evolution? Casey Luskin . .275 36. Leading Theistic Evolutionist PraisesDarwin’s Doubt David Klinghoffer . .278 37. Methodological Naturalism: A Rule That No One Needs or Obeys Paul Nelson . .285 38. Mistaking Intelligent Design for a God-of-the-Gaps Argument Casey Luskin . .295 39. Clarifying Issues: My Response to BioLogos Stephen C . Meyer . .305 40. Walking It Back? Stephen C . Meyer . .313 41. Among Theistic Evolutionists, No Consensus Casey Luskin . .328 42. Denying the Signature: A Response to Bishop and O’Connor Stephen C . Meyer . .334 43. Of Minds and Causes: A Further Response to Bishop and O’Connor Stephen C . Meyer . .352 IX. Independent Confirmation of Meyer’s Thesis 44. Erwin and Valentine: The Cambrian Enigma Unresolved Casey Luskin . .363 Contributors Index Introduction: No Debate over Darwinian Evolution? David Klinghoffer hatever else Stephen Meyer demonstrated about the Wexplosion of biological information required to build the Cam- brian animals, his bestseller Darwin’s Doubt served as a massive rebuke to the mantra-like assertion that there is “no debate,” “no controversy” among scientists about Darwinian evolution. There’s plenty! Meyer showed this in the book by addressing the ar- guments of prominent scientists who seek what they call a “Third Way” (neither intelligent design nor Darwinism) and a new theory of evolution. Nicely coinciding with the release of the paperback edition of Darwin’s Doubt, these researchers launched a provocative website, The Third Way, as a gathering place for those sharing their views.1 And Meyer showed it again with the new Epilogue, included in the paperback, in which he replied in detail to the most substantive of his critics. Debating Darwin’s Doubt could be thought of as a supplement to what Dr. Meyer wrote in the Epilogue. The reception ofDarwin’s Doubt, with serious scientific thinkers arguing back and forth about his thesis, was definitive evidence that the Darwinist mantra is wrong. If there is no scientific controversy about Darwinism versus intelligent design, how 10 Debating Darwin’s Doubt can one explain the volume of disputatious views aired in the wake of the book’s release? Here we have gathered together a sample, collected mostly from writing by Discovery Institute scholars published at our popular news site Evolution News & Views. In these pages Stephen Meyer, Douglas Axe, Ann Gauger, William Dembksi, David Berlinski, Casey Luskin, Paul Nelson and I argue with critics including Charles Marshall (UC Berkeley), Robert Asher (Cambridge University), Martin Poenie (Uni- versity of Texas), Donald Prothero (Natural History Museum of Los Angeles County), Nick Matzke (National Institute for Mathematical and Biological Synthesis), and others. These critics’ arguments in turn were recycled by popular media out- lets such as The New Yorker, National Review, First Things, and around the Internet including more than six hundred reviews (at the moment) on the book’s Amazon page. Nick Matzke’s critiques at Panda’s Thumb, in particular, became a guiding light for the recyclers, brandished again and again by both lofty and anonymous opponents of intelligent de- sign. University of Chicago biologist Jerry Coyne, who writes the blog Why Evolution Is True2 and is arguably the American Richard Dawkins, pointed to Matzke as a justification for failing to wrestle with Meyer’s arguments himself. All this accounts for the extensive treatment given here to Matzke. The critical response toDarwin’s Doubt was matched by warm ap- preciation from readers—and from scientists in high places. Harvard University geneticist George Church praised it as “an opportunity for bridge-building, rather than dismissive polarization.” Biologist Scott Turner, State University of New York, saw in it “an intriguing explora- tion of one of the most remarkable periods in the evolutionary history of life.” Russell Carlson, molecular biologist at the University of Georgia, said that it “demonstrates, based on cutting-edge molecular biology, why explaining the origin of animals is now not just a problem of missing fos- sils, but an even greater engineering problem.” Mark McMenamin, pa- Introduction: No Debate over Darwinian Evolution? 11 leontologist at Mt. Holyoke College and co-author of The Emergence of Animals, greeted the book as “a game changer for the study of evolution.” Bestselling novelist Dean Koontz even threw in an enviable acco- lade from his own professional perspective: “Meyer writes beautifully. He marshals complex information as well as any writer I’ve read.” Did I mention that Darwin’s Doubt hit #7 on the New York Times bestseller list, while also making the bestseller ranks at the Los Angeles Times and Publishers Weekly? So obviously book-buyers were enthusias- tic as well. The challenge in editing this book was one of cutting and sifting from a vast literature in response to Darwin’s Doubt. I was sad, for example, to have to exclude everything we wrote about University of Chicago pathologist Stephen Meredith’s essay in First Things.3 Meredith used Darwin’s Doubt as an occasion to launch a bizarre attack on intelligent design as a revival of a medieval religious heresy, oc- casionalism. That one brought forth a delicious response4 from ENV’s Michael Egnor, distinguished pediatric neurosurgeon at SUNY Stony Brook—which, unfortunately, I was unable to include just because Mer- edith’s criticism was hardly scientific at all but, instead, overwhelmingly theological. Strange to say, in an exchange with Stephen Meyer at The American Spectator, journalist John Derbyshire likewise brought for- ward the charge of “occasionalism.”5 At a certain point, criticisms of the theory of intelligent design get so ridiculous and abstracted from reality that you throw up your hands in wonder.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Understanding the Intelligent Design Creationist Movement: Its True Nature and Goals
    UNDERSTANDING THE INTELLIGENT DESIGN CREATIONIST MOVEMENT: ITS TRUE NATURE AND GOALS A POSITION PAPER FROM THE CENTER FOR INQUIRY OFFICE OF PUBLIC POLICY AUTHOR: BARBARA FORREST, Ph.D. Reviewing Committee: Paul Kurtz, Ph.D.; Austin Dacey, Ph.D.; Stuart D. Jordan, Ph.D.; Ronald A. Lindsay, J. D., Ph.D.; John Shook, Ph.D.; Toni Van Pelt DATED: MAY 2007 ( AMENDED JULY 2007) Copyright © 2007 Center for Inquiry, Inc. Permission is granted for this material to be shared for noncommercial, educational purposes, provided that this notice appears on the reproduced materials, the full authoritative version is retained, and copies are not altered. To disseminate otherwise or to republish requires written permission from the Center for Inquiry, Inc. Table of Contents Section I. Introduction: What is at stake in the dispute over intelligent design?.................. 1 Section II. What is the intelligent design creationist movement? ........................................ 2 Section III. The historical and legal background of intelligent design creationism ................ 6 Epperson v. Arkansas (1968) ............................................................................ 6 McLean v. Arkansas (1982) .............................................................................. 6 Edwards v. Aguillard (1987) ............................................................................. 7 Section IV. The ID movement’s aims and strategy .............................................................. 9 The “Wedge Strategy” .....................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Schelling's Naturalism: Motion, Space, and the Volition of Thought
    View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by Scholarship@Western Western University Scholarship@Western Electronic Thesis and Dissertation Repository 9-23-2015 12:00 AM Schelling's Naturalism: Motion, Space, and the Volition of Thought Ben Woodard The University of Western Ontario Supervisor Tilottama Rajan The University of Western Ontario Joint Supervisor Joan Steigerwald The University of Western Ontario Graduate Program in Theory and Criticism A thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the equirr ements for the degree in Doctor of Philosophy © Ben Woodard 2015 Follow this and additional works at: https://ir.lib.uwo.ca/etd Part of the History of Philosophy Commons Recommended Citation Woodard, Ben, "Schelling's Naturalism: Motion, Space, and the Volition of Thought" (2015). Electronic Thesis and Dissertation Repository. 3314. https://ir.lib.uwo.ca/etd/3314 This Dissertation/Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by Scholarship@Western. It has been accepted for inclusion in Electronic Thesis and Dissertation Repository by an authorized administrator of Scholarship@Western. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Schelling's Naturalism: Motion, Space, and the Volition of Thought (Thesis Format: Monograph) by Benjamin Graham Woodard A thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctorate of Philosophy in Theory and Criticism The School of Graduate and Postdoctoral Studies The University of Western Ontario London, Ontario, Canada © Ben Woodard 2015 Abstract: This dissertation examines F.W.J. von Schelling's Philosophy of Nature (or Naturphilosophie) as a form of early, and transcendentally expansive, naturalism that is, simultaneously, a naturalized transcendentalism.
    [Show full text]
  • Discussion & Study Guide
    DISCUSSION & STUDY GUIDE By Ryan Huxley COURTESY OF Table of Contents Introduction ..................................................................................................................................... 3 Chapter 1: The Cambrian Explosion............................................................................................... 4 Chapter 2: Darwin’s Dilemma ........................................................................................................ 7 Chapter 3: Chinese Fossils ............................................................................................................ 11 Chapter 4: The Phyla .................................................................................................................... 16 Chapter 5: Biological Information ................................................................................................ 19 Answers......................................................................................................................................... 25 Chapter 1: The Cambrian Explosion..................................................................................... 25 Chapter 2: Darwin’s Dilemma .............................................................................................. 27 Chapter 3: Chinese Fossils .................................................................................................... 30 Chapter 4: The Phyla ............................................................................................................ 35 Chapter
    [Show full text]
  • Scientists Dissent List
    A SCIENTIFIC DISSENT FROM DARWINISM “We are skeptical of claims for the ability of random mutation and natural selection to account for the complexity of life. Careful examination of the evidence for Darwinian theory should be encouraged.” This was last publicly updated February 2019. Scientists listed by doctoral degree or current position. Philip Skell* Emeritus, Evan Pugh Prof. of Chemistry, Pennsylvania State University Member of the National Academy of Sciences Lyle H. Jensen* Professor Emeritus, Dept. of Biological Structure & Dept. of Biochemistry University of Washington, Fellow AAAS Maciej Giertych Full Professor, Institute of Dendrology Polish Academy of Sciences Lev Beloussov Prof. of Embryology, Honorary Prof., Moscow State University Member, Russian Academy of Natural Sciences Eugene Buff Ph.D. Genetics Institute of Developmental Biology, Russian Academy of Sciences Emil Palecek Prof. of Molecular Biology, Masaryk University; Leading Scientist Inst. of Biophysics, Academy of Sci., Czech Republic K. Mosto Onuoha Shell Professor of Geology & Deputy Vice-Chancellor, Univ. of Nigeria Fellow, Nigerian Academy of Science Ferenc Jeszenszky Former Head of the Center of Research Groups Hungarian Academy of Sciences M.M. Ninan Former President Hindustan Academy of Science, Bangalore University (India) Denis Fesenko Junior Research Fellow, Engelhardt Institute of Molecular Biology Russian Academy of Sciences (Russia) Sergey I. Vdovenko Senior Research Assistant, Department of Fine Organic Synthesis Institute of Bioorganic Chemistry and Petrochemistry Ukrainian National Academy of Sciences (Ukraine) Henry Schaefer Director, Center for Computational Quantum Chemistry University of Georgia Paul Ashby Ph.D. Chemistry Harvard University Israel Hanukoglu Professor of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology Chairman The College of Judea and Samaria (Israel) Alan Linton Emeritus Professor of Bacteriology University of Bristol (UK) Dean Kenyon Emeritus Professor of Biology San Francisco State University David W.
    [Show full text]
  • The Tiger Beetles (Coleoptera, Cicindelidae) of the Southern Levant and Adjacent Territories: from Cybertaxonomy to Conservation Biology
    A peer-reviewed open-access journal ZooKeys 734: 43–103 The(2018) tiger beetles( Coleoptera, Cicindelidae) of the southern Levant... 43 doi: 10.3897/zookeys.734.21989 MONOGRAPH http://zookeys.pensoft.net Launched to accelerate biodiversity research The tiger beetles (Coleoptera, Cicindelidae) of the southern Levant and adjacent territories: from cybertaxonomy to conservation biology Thorsten Assmann1, Estève Boutaud1, Jörn Buse2, Jörg Gebert3, Claudia Drees4,5, Ariel-Leib-Leonid Friedman4, Fares Khoury6, Tamar Marcus1, Eylon Orbach7, Ittai Renan4, Constantin Schmidt8, Pascale Zumstein1 1 Institute of Ecology, Leuphana University Lüneburg, Universitätsallee 1, D-21335 Lüneburg, Germany 2 Ecosystem Monitoring, Research and Wildlife Conservation (SB 23 Invertebrates and Biodiversity), Black Forest National Park, Kniebisstraße 67, D-72250 Freudenstadt, Germany 3 Karl-Liebknecht-Straße 73, D-01109 Dresden. Germany 4 Steinhardt Museum of Natural History, Tel Aviv University, Ramat-Aviv, Tel Aviv, IL-69978, Israel 5 Biocentre Grindel, Universität Hamburg, Martin-Luther-King-Platz 3, D-20146 Hamburg, Germany 6 Department of Biology and Biotechnology, American University of Madaba, P.O.Box 2882, Amman, JO-11821, Jordan 7 Remez St. 49, IL-36044 Qiryat Tiv’on, Israel 8 Deichstr. 13, D-21354 Bleckede, Germany Corresponding author: Thorsten Assmann ([email protected]) Academic editor: B. Guéorguiev | Received 1 November 2017 | Accepted 15 January 2018 | Published 5 February 2018 http://zoobank.org/7C3C687B-64BB-42A5-B9E4-EC588BCD52D5 Citation: Assmann T, Boutaud E, Buse J, Gebert J, Drees C, Friedman A-L-L, Khoury F, Marcus T, Orbach E, Renan I, Schmidt C, Zumstein P (2018) The tiger beetles (Coleoptera, Cicindelidae) of the southern Levant and adjacent territories: from cybertaxonomy to conservation biology.
    [Show full text]
  • Morphology and Function in the Cambrian Burgess Shale
    Haug et al. BMC Evolutionary Biology 2012, 12:162 http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2148/12/162 RESEARCH ARTICLE Open Access Morphology and function in the Cambrian Burgess Shale megacheiran arthropod Leanchoilia superlata and the application of a descriptive matrix Joachim T Haug1*, Derek EG Briggs2,3 and Carolin Haug1 Abstract Background: Leanchoilia superlata is one of the best known arthropods from the middle Cambrian Burgess Shale of British Columbia. Here we re-describe the morphology of L. superlata and discuss its possible autecology. The re-description follows a standardized scheme, the descriptive matrix approach, designed to provide a template for descriptions of other megacheiran species. Results: Our findings differ in several respects from previous interpretations. Examples include a more slender body; a possible hypostome; a small specialised second appendage, bringing the number of pairs of head appendages to four; a further sub-division of the great appendage, making it more similar to that of other megacheirans; and a complex joint of the exopod reflecting the arthropod’s swimming capabilities. Conclusions: Different aspects of the morphology, for example, the morphology of the great appendage and the presence of a basipod with strong median armature on the biramous appendages indicate that L. superlata was an active and agile necto-benthic predator (not a scavenger or deposit feeder as previously interpreted). Keywords: Megacheira, Great-appendage arthropods, Chelicerata sensu lato, Descriptive matrix, Active predator Background shared with other species. As a consequence, morpho- The description of species is fundamental to the science logical details in many phylogenetic matrices have to be of zoology, including taxonomy, phylogenetic systema- (re-)interpreted, often without the benefit of a compre- tics, functional morphology and ultimately evolutionary hensive description.
    [Show full text]
  • Creation, Design and Evolution: Can Science Discover Or Eliminate God?
    University of St. Thomas Journal of Law and Public Policy Volume 4 Issue 1 Fall 2009 Article 5 January 2009 Creation, Design and Evolution: Can Science Discover or Eliminate God? Peter M.J. Hess Follow this and additional works at: https://ir.stthomas.edu/ustjlpp Part of the First Amendment Commons, Law and Philosophy Commons, and the Religion Law Commons Recommended Citation Peter M. Hess, Creation, Design and Evolution: Can Science Discover or Eliminate God?, 4 U. ST. THOMAS J.L. & PUB. POL'Y 102 (2009). Available at: https://ir.stthomas.edu/ustjlpp/vol4/iss1/5 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by UST Research Online and the University of St. Thomas Journal of Law and Public Policy. For more information, please contact the Editor-in-Chief at [email protected]. CREATION, DESIGN AND EVOLUTION: CAN SCIENCE DISCOVER OR ELIMINATE GOD? PETER M. J. HESS, PH.D.* NATIONAL CENTER FOR SCIENCE EDUCATION "The heavens declare the glory of God, and the firmament shows forth his handiwork." Psalms 19:1 INTRODUCTION: THE PLAYING OUT OF THE DESIGN ARGUMENT IN THE WEST Every culture has its views about the universe, about the human person, and about the great metaphysical questions that confront us. How ought we to think about the relationship between cosmology, anthropology, and theology? This may be a challenge for us in our increasingly secular post- modem culture, but for most of human history it was not an issue. In the Judeo-Christian tradition these areas of human reflection were naturally bound up together, as in the Hebrew psalmist's proto-statement of the argument from design: "the heavens declare the glory of God, and the firmament shows forth his handiwork."' The scholastic university culture of the High Middle Ages held as its ideal the "unity of knowledge," or unitas scientiae, approaching the study of the universe as a coherent and knowable whole.
    [Show full text]
  • A Brief Look at Mathematics and Theology Philip J
    Humanistic Mathematics Network Journal Issue 27 Article 14 Winter 1-1-2004 A Brief Look at Mathematics and Theology Philip J. Davis Brown University Follow this and additional works at: http://scholarship.claremont.edu/hmnj Part of the Logic and Foundations of Mathematics Commons, Mathematics Commons, and the Religious Thought, Theology and Philosophy of Religion Commons Recommended Citation Davis, Philip J. (2004) "A Brief Look at Mathematics and Theology," Humanistic Mathematics Network Journal: Iss. 27, Article 14. Available at: http://scholarship.claremont.edu/hmnj/vol1/iss27/14 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Journals at Claremont at Scholarship @ Claremont. It has been accepted for inclusion in Humanistic Mathematics Network Journal by an authorized administrator of Scholarship @ Claremont. For more information, please contact [email protected]. 1 A Brief Look at Mathematics and Theology Philip J. Davis "Such a really remarkable discovery. I wanted your opinion on it. You know the formula m over naught equals infinity, m being any positive number? [m/0 = ]. Well, why not reduce the equation to a simpler form by multiplying both sides by naught? In which case you have m equals infinity times naught [m = x 0]. That is to say, a positive number is the product of zero and infinity. Doesn't that demonstrate the creation of the Universe by an infinite power out of nothing? Doesn't it?" Aldous Huxley, Point Counter Point, (1928), Chapter XI. I Introduction We are living in a mathematical age. Our lives, from the personal to the communal, from the communal to the international, from the biological and physical to the economic and even to the ethical, are increasingly mathematicized.
    [Show full text]
  • Intelligent Design Creationism and the Constitution
    View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by Washington University St. Louis: Open Scholarship Washington University Law Review Volume 83 Issue 1 2005 Is It Science Yet?: Intelligent Design Creationism and the Constitution Matthew J. Brauer Princeton University Barbara Forrest Southeastern Louisiana University Steven G. Gey Florida State University Follow this and additional works at: https://openscholarship.wustl.edu/law_lawreview Part of the Constitutional Law Commons, Education Law Commons, First Amendment Commons, Religion Law Commons, and the Science and Technology Law Commons Recommended Citation Matthew J. Brauer, Barbara Forrest, and Steven G. Gey, Is It Science Yet?: Intelligent Design Creationism and the Constitution, 83 WASH. U. L. Q. 1 (2005). Available at: https://openscholarship.wustl.edu/law_lawreview/vol83/iss1/1 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Law School at Washington University Open Scholarship. It has been accepted for inclusion in Washington University Law Review by an authorized administrator of Washington University Open Scholarship. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Washington University Law Quarterly VOLUME 83 NUMBER 1 2005 IS IT SCIENCE YET?: INTELLIGENT DESIGN CREATIONISM AND THE CONSTITUTION MATTHEW J. BRAUER BARBARA FORREST STEVEN G. GEY* TABLE OF CONTENTS ABSTRACT ................................................................................................... 3 INTRODUCTION..................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Atheism and Its Scientific Pretensions David Berlinski
    pdf The Devil's Delusion: Atheism And Its Scientific Pretensions David Berlinski - free pdf download The Devil's Delusion: Atheism And Its Scientific Pretensions PDF, The Devil's Delusion: Atheism And Its Scientific Pretensions PDF Download, The Devil's Delusion: Atheism And Its Scientific Pretensions Download PDF, The Devil's Delusion: Atheism And Its Scientific Pretensions by David Berlinski Download, The Devil's Delusion: Atheism And Its Scientific Pretensions Full Collection, PDF The Devil's Delusion: Atheism And Its Scientific Pretensions Free Download, online free The Devil's Delusion: Atheism And Its Scientific Pretensions, pdf download The Devil's Delusion: Atheism And Its Scientific Pretensions, Download Free The Devil's Delusion: Atheism And Its Scientific Pretensions Book, pdf free download The Devil's Delusion: Atheism And Its Scientific Pretensions, The Devil's Delusion: Atheism And Its Scientific Pretensions David Berlinski pdf, David Berlinski epub The Devil's Delusion: Atheism And Its Scientific Pretensions, pdf David Berlinski The Devil's Delusion: Atheism And Its Scientific Pretensions, Download The Devil's Delusion: Atheism And Its Scientific Pretensions E-Books, Read Online The Devil's Delusion: Atheism And Its Scientific Pretensions E-Books, Read Best Book The Devil's Delusion: Atheism And Its Scientific Pretensions Online, Read The Devil's Delusion: Atheism And Its Scientific Pretensions Books Online Free, The Devil's Delusion: Atheism And Its Scientific Pretensions PDF read online, The Devil's Delusion: Atheism And Its Scientific Pretensions Read Download, The Devil's Delusion: Atheism And Its Scientific Pretensions Books Online, CLICK FOR DOWNLOAD Wow. Dot much. And if i were or someone who is not a fan of history i 'm not sure ms.
    [Show full text]
  • The Origin and Evolution of Arthropods Graham E
    INSIGHT REVIEW NATURE|Vol 457|12 February 2009|doi:10.1038/nature07890 The origin and evolution of arthropods Graham E. Budd1 & Maximilian J. Telford2 The past two decades have witnessed profound changes in our understanding of the evolution of arthropods. Many of these insights derive from the adoption of molecular methods by systematists and developmental biologists, prompting a radical reordering of the relationships among extant arthropod classes and their closest non-arthropod relatives, and shedding light on the developmental basis for the origins of key characteristics. A complementary source of data is the discovery of fossils from several spectacular Cambrian faunas. These fossils form well-characterized groupings, making the broad pattern of Cambrian arthropod systematics increasingly consensual. The arthropods are one of the most familiar and ubiquitous of all ani- Arthropods are monophyletic mal groups. They have far more species than any other phylum, yet Arthropods encompass a great diversity of animal taxa known from the living species are merely the surviving branches of a much greater the Cambrian to the present day. The four living groups — myriapods, diversity of extinct forms. One group of crustacean arthropods, the chelicerates, insects and crustaceans — are known collectively as the barnacles, was studied extensively by Charles Darwin. But the origins Euarthropoda. They are united by a set of distinctive features, most and the evolution of arthropods in general, embedded in what is now notably the clear segmentation of their bodies, a sclerotized cuticle and known as the Cambrian explosion, were a source of considerable con- jointed appendages. Even so, their great diversity has led to consider- cern to him, and he devoted a substantial and anxious section of On able debate over whether they had single (monophyletic) or multiple the Origin of Species1 to discussing this subject: “For instance, I cannot (polyphyletic) origins from a soft-bodied, legless ancestor.
    [Show full text]
  • Darwins-Corrosive-Idea.Pdf
    This report was prepared and published by Discovery Institute’s Center for Science and Culture, a non-profit, non-partisan educational and research organization. The Center’s mission is to advance the understanding that human beings and nature are the result of intelligent design rather than a blind and undirected process. We seek long-term scientific and cultural change through cutting-edge scientific research and scholarship; education and training of young leaders; communication to the general public; and advocacy of academic freedom and free speech for scientists, teachers, and students. For more information about the Center, visit www.discovery.org/id. FOR FREE RESOURCES ABOUT SCIENCE AND FAITH, VISIT WWW.SCIENCEANDGOD.ORG/RESOURCES. PUBLISHED NOVEMBER, 2016. © 2016 BY DISCOVERY INSTITUTE. DARWIN’S CORROSIVE IDEA The Impact of Evolution on Attitudes about Faith, Ethics, and Human Uniqueness John G. West, PhD* EXECUTIVE SUMMARY In his influential book Darwin’s Dangerous Idea, have asked about the impact of science on a person’s philosopher Daniel Dennett praised Darwinian religious faith typically have not explored the evolution for being a “universal acid” that dissolves impact of specific scientific ideas such as Darwinian traditional religious and moral beliefs.1 Evolution- evolution.5 ary biologist Richard Dawkins has similarly praised In order to gain insights into the impact of Darwin for making “it possible to be an intellect- specific scientific ideas on popular beliefs about ually fulfilled atheist.”2 Although numerous studies God and ethics, Discovery Institute conducted a have documented the influence of Darwinian nationwide survey of a representative sample of theory and other scientific ideas on the views of 3,664 American adults.
    [Show full text]