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.
More like this
The new Sherlock Holmes movie is, of course, a must see for Holmes buffs, and beyond that ... for regular movie goers ... it is still recommended. The movie is a high-test, quirky, action packed, funny cliff hanger.
I saw the new movie Sherlock Holmes over the weekend. Short review: I liked it far more than I expected to, though it is a bit silly in places. Longer review, with a few spoilers, below the fold.
My main intellectual activity today was to rotate curves around various axes, and then explain how to find the volumes of the solids that resulted. Doesn't put me in the mood for heavy, thought-provoking blogging.
I've become very interested in Minnesota history, and by interested I mean annoyed in many cases. The first thing white Minnesotans did was to exploit the Indians.
The simple solution is to just publish their millions-of-dollars worth of secret research they've been boasting about.