Peer-Reviewed Paper: Development Needs Ontogenetic Information that Cannot Arise from Neo-Darwinian Mechanisms

_{Casey Luskin
June 2, 2014

Intelligent Design

11}

Papers like this show that when freed from the "central dogmas" of neo-Darwinian evolution, a theory of intelligent design can open up promising and fruitful avenues of research and thinking. Read More ›

^{Type
post

Author
Casey Luskin

Date
April 18, 2014

Categories
Computational Sciences
Evolution
Intelligent Design
Tagged
, __k-review, BIO-Complexity, peer review, science}

Latest BIO-Complexity Paper Finds that on Irreducible Complexity, Michael Behe Has Not Been Refuted

_{Casey Luskin
April 18, 2014

Computational Sciences, Evolution, Intelligent Design

3}

"Behe's concept of irreducible complexity has not been falsified by computer models." Read More ›

^{Type
post

Author
Casey Luskin

Date
April 7, 2014

Categories
Evolution
Tagged
, __k-review, BIO-Complexity, peer review, Research, science}

BIO-Complexity Paper: Why Chaitin’s Mathematical “Proof” of Darwinian Evolution Fails

_{Casey Luskin
April 7, 2014

Evolution

8}

There are many reasons why Chaitin's model does not accurately reflect how Darwinian evolution works, if it does work, in the real world. Read More ›

^{Type
post

Author
Casey Luskin

Date
December 20, 2013

Categories
Evolution
Intelligent Design
Tagged
, __k-review, DNA, peer review, Research}

Codes Within Codes: How Dual-Use Codons Challenge Statistical Methods for Inferring Natural Selection

_{Casey Luskin
December 20, 2013

Evolution, Intelligent Design

7}

It boggles the mind to think about how such "codes within codes" could evolve by random mutation and natural selection. But that's not all. Read More ›

^{Type
post

Author
Casey Luskin

Date
December 11, 2013

Categories
Science
Scientific Freedom
Tagged
, __k-review, News, peer review, Research, science, Views}

Sign of the Times: Nobel Prize-Winning Biologist Refuses to Submit Papers to Top-Tier "Luxury" Science Journals

_{Casey Luskin
December 11, 2013

Science, Scientific Freedom

8}

Occasionally at Discovery Institute we get an e-mail from some disgruntled Darwin advocate or other that taunts us by brandishing the names of luxury science journals. Read More ›

^{Type
post

Author
Casey Luskin

Date
October 18, 2013

Categories
Intelligent Design
Tagged
, __k-review, peer review, science}

Citation Counts Are Challenged as Metric of Scientific Merit

_{Casey Luskin
October 18, 2013

Intelligent Design

3}

An otherwise scientifically sound paper might not be cited for reasons that are political, not scientific. In the intelligent-design movement, we've seen this many times. Read More ›

^{Type
post

Author
Casey Luskin

Date
August 28, 2013

Categories
Evolution
Intelligent Design
Tagged
, __k-review, BIO-Complexity, peer review, Research}

The Fabric of Nature: Michael Denton’s New BIO-Complexity Paper Argues for “Laws of Form” Finely Tuned for Life

_{Casey Luskin
August 28, 2013

Evolution, Intelligent Design

7}

Just as Darwinism cannot explain these laws, the laws themselves cannot explain all the adaptive complexity of life. Structuralism leaves plenty of room for intelligent design. Read More ›

^{Type
post

Author
Casey Luskin

Date
June 13, 2013

Categories
Intelligent Design
Tagged
, __k-review, peer review, Research, science}

Peer-Reviewed Pro-Intelligent Design Articles and the “Insurrection” Against Journal Impact Factors

_{Casey Luskin
June 13, 2013

Intelligent Design

8}

An e-mail correspondent challenges our list of peer-reviewed pro-ID articles, pointing out that some of the journals are apparently not listed in the Thomson-Reuters Journal Citation Reports. Read More ›

^{Type
post

Author
Casey Luskin

Date
December 13, 2012

Categories
Evolution
Tagged
, __k-review, Evolutionary Informatics Lab, peer review, Robert J. Marks II, science, William A. Dembski}

Peer-Reviewed Science: There Isn’t “Plenty of Time for Evolution”

_{Casey Luskin
December 13, 2012

Evolution

11}

Once again, the Evolutionary Informatics Lab has shown that simulations of evolution seem to work only because they've been intelligently designed. Read More ›

Terabytes of binary code data flying in a stream of information. Wavy field of coded blockchains. Neural network, points and numbers 3D illustration

^{Type
post

Author
Casey Luskin

Date
November 28, 2012

Categories
Intelligent Design
Philosophy of Science
Tagged
, __nedited, “consensus science”, Charles Lyell, defining science, definist fallacy, demarcation criteria, Design Inference, intelligence, methodological naturalism, methodological pluralism, miracles, mutations, natural selection, peer review, positive case for design, predictions, scientific method, testability}

More on How We Can Know Intelligent Design Is Science

_{Casey Luskin
November 28, 2012

Intelligent Design, Philosophy of Science

11}

Philosophers of science have long debated the precise definition of science. Read More ›