Michael Behe opens his new book Darwin Devolves with the story of the polar bear. It’s big and distinctive like a Darwin champion new species, but it’s really a variety of brown bear that “evolved” to survive in arctic cold (in fact, it can hybridize with Alaskan brown bears). How did it do that? Behe shows that genes for regulating fat and for metabolizing cholesterol became broken or blunted, and this had a side effect of keeping the bears warm in cold climates, changing their coat color, while permitting them to survive on fatty diets of seals. Darwin’s mechanism did not create anything new; it broke things, but in the case of the polar bear, it worked out. A Similar Story A similar story can be told about goldfish, it turns out. Goldfish underwent whole-genome …
It was a dark and stormy July night in Seattle yesterday until, I noticed, just when Mike Behe, author of Darwin Devolves, was scheduled to speak at Seattle Center’s McCaw Hall. Then the rain lifted and the clouds began to part. Here are excellent photos of the wonderful and celebratory evening, from photographer Nathan Jacobson: John West introducing Professor Behe. Michael Behe takes the stage. Michael Behe and John West engage in a Q&A, always the best part, with a packed house. The inevitable book table before the audience gets there. The book table after the audience gets there. “Dr. Behe, will you please sign my copy of Darwin Devolves for me?” The clouds part and the moon is visible over the Space Needle. Have you …
Michael Behe had a great reception this evening to a packed house at Seattle Center for his book Darwin Devolves. We broadcast it live on Facebook, but the livestream is fortunately archived via the Center for Science & Culture. So you can see it now if you missed it! (You have to advance forward to 59:23.) John West appropriately introduced Dr. Behe as the “archetypal mild-mannered professor” who “helped provoke a revolutionary debate.” Referring to the new Science Uprising episode in which Behe stars, Dr. West noted, “If you ever wondered what Dr. Behe has in common with the X-Men films, you will want to watch this new episode of Science Uprising.” Does that imply Michael Behe, the gentle biochemist, is a superhero? Well, in an intellectual sense, he is. The crowd …
Like most of the world, you probably don’t live within convenient driving distance of Seattle. But don’t despair! You can still join us Wednesday at 7:30 pm Pacific time to hear from Michael Behe and help us celebrate the success of his book Darwin Devolves: The New Science About DNA That Challenges Evolution. All you have to do is go to the Center for Science & Culture’s Facebook page, right here. We’ll be broadcasting live from McCall Hall at Seattle Center. Professor Behe’s book sparked an epic series of disputations with scientists determined to defend traditional Darwinian theory. You can find the record of those exchanges at the Darwin Devolves website. Judge for yourself: I think it’s evident that the gentle biochemist resoundingly trounced his critics in …
In a lecture, Phillip Johnson cited physicist Richard Feynman on a scientist’s obligation to be honest — not only with himself or in other scientific contexts but, not one bit less, when speaking to the lay public. “You should not fool the laymen when you’re talking as a scientist.” That such a thing would need to be said is itself revealing. What’s more, Feynman insisted, you should “bend over backwards to show how you may be wrong.” The comments are taken from a Commencement address by Feynman in 1974 at Caltech. Johnson, a founding father of modern intelligent design theory, was so moved by this that he said “I wish it could be set to music.” As far as I know it hasn’t been set to music. But the idea is a major theme in the new Science Uprising series. …
In a lecture, Phillip Johnson cited physicist Richard Feynman on a scientist’s obligation to be honest — not only with himself or in other scientific contexts but, not one bit less, when speaking to the lay public. “You should not fool the laymen when you’re talking as a scientist.” That such a thing would need to be said is itself revealing. What’s more, Feynman insisted, you should “bend over backwards to show how you may be wrong.” The comments are taken from a Commencement address by Feynman in 1974 at Caltech. Johnson, a founding father of modern intelligent design theory, was so moved by this that he said “I wish it could be set to music.” As far as I know it hasn’t been set to music. But the idea is a major theme in the new Science Uprising series. …
We got a look into the sausage factory that is Science Magazine when that prestigious journal reviewed Michael Behe’s recent book, Darwin Devolves. The review was a “train wreck,” as Behe showed. Neither the three authors nor the editors of Science ever took responsibility for its many demonstrable failings and they refused to publish a response from Professor Behe. I am not going to relitigate the episode, but you can find the record of that and other interactions with Behe’s critics at his book’s website. Fear and Loathing Now here’s another troubling peek behind the scenes at the top science journal in the United States. Back in 2008, Science published what would become an influential research article, claiming brain-based evidence for a physiological basis behind …
A new study published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences reports on the canine musculature that underlies “puppy dog eyes.” The study has gotten tons of affectionate press, probably because puppies are so darned cute. The story is also cast in an evolutionary framework. The researchers found that a particular muscle abbreviated LAOM is almost always present and well-developed in dogs but is often missing or much less well-developed in wolves. The muscle allows dogs to raise their inner eyebrows in a way that humans find attractive. Since dogs are descended from wolves, the change is ipso facto “evolution.” The authors go on to speculate that the trait was selected over time by humans adopting the dogs that seemed cutest. Well, okay, why not. However, …
Two recent experiments highlight the power of mind to direct natural processes against astronomical improbabilities. One study boasts of getting “New genes out of nothing.” (The echo of Lawrence Krauss’s book A Universe from Nothing is noteworthy.) The other study shows what human minds can do with protein precursors (the translated products of genes) by using “design selection” as opposed to natural selection. The Challenge In the “genes out of nothing” camp, researchers at Uppsala University describe the challenge they face — and that standard Darwinian processes had to face: How do new genes and functional proteins arise and develop? This is one of the most fundamental issues in evolutionary biology. Two different types of mechanism have been proposed: (1) new …
Do you ever wonder what Darwin proponents would say if they ventured to address arguments for intelligent design in detail? Do they ever? I asked Brazilian chemist Marcos Eberlin to comment based on his own experiences. He was in Seattle to speak about his new book, Foresight: How the Chemistry of Life Reveals Planning and Purpose. https://youtu.be/nfnTdfgo2vU Of course, sometimes evolutionists do debate about specifics. But remember what happened when they came after Michael Behe on polar bear genes and other matters in his book Darwin Devolves. Find the archives of that debate here, including Behe’s exchanges with Richard Lenski, Nathan Lents, and others. As Eberlin observes, for Darwinists, the “devil is in the details” and they fear the devil. Come to think of it, …
