The DI's Johnny West complains:
Last year, Bill Dembski reported on how he was contacted by the New Scientist's Bob Holmes, who assured him:
It seems to me the media coverage of intelligent design has mostly failed to present your case on scientific grounds, and I'd like to remedy that.Of course, Mr. Holmes had no intention of covering the scientific case for design, and his resultant article was little more than your standard anti-ID hack job.
The problem is, presenting ID's "case on scientific grounds" inevitably means attacking ID. Even ID advocates acknowledge that there's no theory, and their own lists of ID publications are suspiciously devoid of new data.
- Log in to post comments
More like this
John West, associate director of the Center for the Renewal of Science and Culture at the Discovery Institute, has replied to my "fulminating" essay, posted to Dispatches, In the Agora and the Panda's Thumb, on ID and "divine design". You'll recall that Mr. West had claimed that he and his fellow…
Bobby Maddex, senior editor of Crux magazine, has posted a response to my article (posted here and at Panda's Thumb) pointing out several false claims in a couple of blog entries associated with Crux, one by him and one by John Coleman. John Coleman responded both rationally and graciously in a…
Larry Farma has left a long comment in response to my post about the DI's claim that Judge Jones should not have ruled on the scientific status of ID in the Dover case. Because that post is getting old and the comment is so long, I figured it should be moved up top and responded to in its own post…
I've just received an email with another batch of those delightful Worldview Weekend essays. Sadly, there are none by Kirk Cameron this time, but the other authors put together a strong effort to be as ridiculous as he is. This essay by Kerby Anderson, president of Probe Ministries, on the "myths…
The simple solution is to just publish their millions-of-dollars worth of secret research they've been boasting about.