Just found a new blog that critiques ID claims, The Inverted Bowl. The owner, who goes by the nom de plume The Fallible Fiend, has a Masters in engineering math and computer science and does some good writing. He has a short answer to Behe's claims about falsification, pointing out that he misunderstands the concept entirely in claiming that disproving a single example of an IC system would falsify IC or ID as a general notion. He also has a longer post that debunks DaveScot's claims about humans and coelecanths. Definitely a blog worth keeping an eye on.
More like this
Here's another basic concept for the list: what does it mean for a claim to be falsifiable, and why does falsifiability matter so much to scientists and philosophers of science?
The Wall Street Journal's Matthew Dalton reports:
Revere stirs the pot (of chicken soup) to ask why alternative therapies are presumptively regarded as pseudo-science.
I agree with Barry Brook that Ian Plimer's approach to climate science in Heaven Earth is unscientific.