Science and Culture Today Discovering Design in Nature
Topic

Robert Pennock

dragonfly
dragonfly
Photo credit: Dustin Humes, via Unsplash.

Dembski and Ruse Look Back on 20 Years of Debate — And a Special Anniversary

The protest about the “spectre of intelligent design” was telling. When critics start talking that way, you can’t help wondering if ID is onto something. Read More ›
country junction
Photo: A country junction, by Michael Dibb, CC BY-SA 2.0 <https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/2.0>, via Wikimedia Commons.

Darwinists’ Delusion: Closing Thoughts on Jason Rosenhouse

Does it really need to be pointed out that roads are designed? That where they go is designed? And that even badly laid out roads are laid out by design? Read More ›
Michael Behe
Photo: Michael Behe speaking at the 2020 Dallas Conference on Science & Faith, by Chris Morgan.

Excerpt: A Reply to Michael Ruse

Let me tell a little story about blood clotting, Russell Doolittle, and Michael Ruse. Read More ›
Darwin on Trial trailer

Majestic Ascent: Phillip Johnson’s Darwin on Trial

There is some evidence that once again, the diapason of opinion is being changed. The claims of intelligent design are too insistent and too plausible to be frivolously dismissed. Read More ›
sunrise 2

Dump the Metaphysics — How About Methodological Regularism?

Science doesn’t need methodological naturalism. It doesn’t need methodological theism, either. Read More ›
trofim-lysenko
Trofim Lysenko
Trofim Lysenko
Nationaal Archief, the Dutch National Archives, Public Domain via Wikimedia Commons

American Lysenkoism

Darwinists have compared intelligent design to Lysenkoism, but they have it backward. Read More ›
aerial-of-sunset-in-princeton-new-jersey-stockpack-adobe-sto-223720420-stockpack-adobestock
Aerial of Sunset in Princeton New Jersey
Image Credit: Jin - Adobe Stock

Princeton Historian: Falsifiability Not a Requirement of Science

"The renowned philosopher Karl Popper coined the term 'demarcation problem' to describe the quest to distinguish science from pseudoscience. He also proposed a solution." Read More ›

Darwinists Giving Different Answers When Discussing Robert Pennock’s UCSD Lecture

As I noted earlier, some Darwinists have contacted me insisting that not all freshmen were required to attend the lecture by anti-ID philosopher Robert Pennock at the University of California, San Diego (UCSD) (first described here). I felt it was clear that freshmen were required to attend the lecture, given that UCSD’s main student website, Tritonlink, stated, “All first-quarter freshmen are required to attend the event.” Wanting to be diligent, I decided to contact organizers of the lecture to find out the facts. What I found was that, when Darwinists inquired, they were given different answers than I was given. Additionally, I gained fascinating insight into the mindset of Robert Pennock himself. One Answer for Darwinists, a Different Answer for Read More ›

Update: Were All UCSD Freshmen Required to Attend Pennock Lecture?

(Editors Note: This Post Was Revised and Updated on November 28, 2006): Some people have contacted me insisting that not all freshmen were required to attend the lecture by Robert Pennock at the University of California, San Diego (UCSD) (first discussed here). In this regard, consider the following points: On a related matter, it seems that I misunderstood Ed Brayton’s recent report on his experience with Robert Pennock, where I thought Brayton provided further corroboration that the UCSD lecture was required of all first-quarter freshmen. Brayton has responded that he has no independent information that the UCSD lecture required all freshman to attend other than my original post. So I have retracted my prior post here on Brayton. It’s interesting Read More ›

Aftermath of Robert Pennock’s Talk

On Tuesday, I reported that the University of California at San Diego (UCSD) required all freshmen to attend an anti-ID lecture by Robert Pennock. Apparently it was a packed house in the 5000-seat RIMAC arena, illustrating that thousands of freshmen did attend (as they were required). In my prior post I noted that Pennock’s “arguments are fairly standard misrepresentations of intelligent design” and tried to make “educated predictions about Pennock will say.” I know many pro-ID people were in the audience. One friend contacted me and confirmed that most of my predictions about Pennock’s arguments were correct. Pennock made the following arguments, as I predicted: Why Not Praise UCSD for Discussing ID? A friendly questioner e-mailed me asking why I Read More ›

© Discovery Institute