Ian Musgrave has a brilliant post showing that Dembski's revisiting of the old creationist canard that Dawkins' 1984 Weasel program, designed to show that random variation and selective retention can "evolve" a target phrase, in this case Shakespeare's "Methinks it is a weasel" (oops; I nearly had my own mutation there - I typed "methings"), is a load of old cobbler's. Of course we expect nothing less from Ian*, and nothing better from Dembksi.
* But my title is better than his.
- Log in to post comments
More like this
As lots of you have heard, William Dembski and Robert Marks just had
href="http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/xpl/tocresult.jsp?isYear=2009&isnumber=5208652&Submit32=View+Contents">a
paper published in an IEEE journal. In the last couple of days, I've received about 30
copies of the paper in…
It's terribly unfair. Not only are the paladins of evolution handsomer, wittier, more charming, and with a deeper grasp of the truth than the orc-like hordes of creationism, but even our ancillary skills are wielded with more effortless panache than our opponents' primary talents. Here's a…
Unbelievable. Dembski is bragging about getting a peer-reviewed paper published — in IEEE Transactions, so not a biology journal, and it's a paper about search algorithms — and he misrepresents Dawkins again. He just had to toss in his garbled version of the "Methinks it is a weasel" program in…
William Dembski spoke at the University of Chicago in August, and a video of the talk is available. I tried to watch it, I really did, but I ended up skipping through most of it (one of the advantages of seeing it on youtube!). Here's my rather stream-of-consciousness monolog as I was flicking like…