Xeluan

Folks,

For your reading pleasure I present http://www.designinference.com/docum...ro_Contrib.pdf which is Dembski's chapter from the latest tome regarding the 150 year old impending death of Darwinism (or is it Evolutionary theory or methodlogical naturalism or science in general. I'm never quite sure what the ID movement is arguing against). The book is "Uncommon Dissent - Intellectuals Who Find Darwinism Unconvincing."

Note the contributors. Apart from the usuals, Superbrains Langan and Roland F Hirsch (well known to Arn regulars) get a run on jumper. I am thinking that the talent pool for ID lacks some depth. However, their contributions may be entertaining (and in Langan's case likely incomprehensible) if Arn is anything to go by.

Xeluan

Is it just me or is Dembski's introduction basically a tirade against Dawkins and Dennett. The same thing is happening over at Arn.

Some of the contributions are on the web (and likely familiar to a few people).

Berlinski's "Deniable Darwin"

Superbrains "Cheating The Millennium" (Draft)

Tipler on Peer Review

Johnson's "Darwinism (or Evolution on this site) as Dogma"

Nic Tamzek

Thanks for digging up some of the articles that are already online.

I just posted a critique of one specific point of Dembski's latest article that I thought was particularly egregious:

Dembski on functional subsystems in "Uncommon Dissent"
http://www.iscid.org/boards/ubb-get_...-t-000011.html

...archived at AE, and others are invited to include their comments, links to threads, etc.

AE thread:
http://www.antievolution.org/cgi-bin...ct=ST;f=2;t=72

Nic Tamzek

Whoa, man. For more of the same, check this out:
http://www.teleologic.org/
:banghead: :banghead: :banghead:

pangloss

I wonder if the book will have links to Hirsch getting demolished at ARN every time he addressed something technical....

Xeluan

Nah. Hirsch's article will most likely be "Darwinian theories are so little used in the life sciences" repeated over and over hoping that repetition will make it so.

pz

Dear jebus. It's all distilled and concentrated crap, yet he still goes on and on endlessly. It's like the antithesis of scientific thought.

Whenever we post links to the superbrains, we really ought to require a big warning, something like "DANGER: Reading these pages will reduce your intelligence!"

Dr.GH

I bailed out of ARN just about when the "superbrains" showed up. I had to bookmark that page in a new subdirectory: /Humor/Lunatic Fringe

pangloss

I also like the little bio-sketches of the contributors.
Many of them have been shown the door intellectually at ARn and/or ISCID.

Pretty sad bunch.

it also seems that a number of them are clearly creationists.

KC

Am I the only one wondering why Jonathan Wells isn't included?

KC