James Randerson, at the GrauniadGuardian blog site makes an interesting point about the new bionic eye. It's only a 4x4 grid of monochrome pixels, but it's revolutionised the life of a blind man. Of what use is 1/2^n of an eye? Well it's enough to navigate. Randerson points out that this totally demolishes the ID argument. So it's not only a cool invention, but a great rebuttal.
More like this
James Randerson asks this question, but actually leaving only four slots open as "...If anyone plans not to include Darwin I'm going to have to ask them to step outside." a sentiment with
Ken Miller makes an interesting proposal to James Randerson: he thinks we ought to reclaim the word "desig
Since I was just mean to the British press, here's a compensatory accolade: here's a nice, sharp editorial from James Randerson.
This letter to the New Zealand Herald was written to protest a claim that NZ was a "Christian nation". It's got a nice twist to it.
I might have stunned couple local creationists some bit when I mentioned that a) my aunt's cat (cataract in another eye) catches mice in dark winter and b)I know an one-eye(another eye made of glass) guy who is excellent excavator driver, one of the best drivers in our province. One of those creationists had just boasted about his two eyes and ears that how vital they are for 3D pictures, stereophonic etc ..:D
Regards,
Mr Kari A Tikkanen, Finland, EU