The Evidential Argument from Biological Evolution, Part 2: Is Evolution Evidence for Theism?

Let's begin reviewing the logical form of the argument, as described in Part 1 of this series. (1) Evolution is antecedently much more probable on the assumption that naturalism is true than on the assumption that theism is true. (2) The statement that pain and pleasure systematically connected to reproductive success is antecedently much more probable on the assumption that evolutionary naturalism is true than on the assumption that evolutionary theism is true. (3) Therefore, evolution … [Read more...]

Jonathan McLatchie: Fact-Checking Wikipedia on Common Descent: The Evidence from Paleontology (2011)

Jonathan McLatchie is an up-and-coming Christian apologist who also has a strong background in biology. I met him in person once while I was speaking in Seattle and he was an intern at the Discovery Institute. He seemed to me to be a very nice and intelligent fellow.McLatchie wrote a series of blog posts critiquing the Wikipedia article on the evidence of common descent; McLatchie's article provides his critique of what Wikipedia has to say about the evidence for common descent from … [Read more...]

Another Christian Apologist Uses Fallacious Objections to Evolution

Real shocker, right?My Twitter feed included a link to an article which I want to comment on:Bill Nye's Naturalistic Evolution is Absurd: Contesting 'Undeniable: Evolution and the Science of Creation': Bill Nye's Atheistic Evolution Is PreposterousEvolution is one of the most powerful and important ideas ever developed in the history of science. Every question it raises leads to new answers, new discoveries, and new smarter questions. The science of evolution is as expansive as n … [Read more...]

Torley’s Response to Cavin & Colombetti on the Resurrection of Jesus

This was apparently published last December, but I wasn't aware of it until today. Vincent Torley provides an interesting Intelligent Design perspective on C&C's slide presentation on the resurrection of Jesus.LINK … [Read more...]

Swinburne’s Cosmological and Teleological Arguments – Part 5

The Cosmological Argument (TCA) is the first argument in Swinburne's inductive case for the existence of God. The arguments are presented in a specific order, each argument adding one more contingent fact (or specific set of contingent facts) to the facts presented in the premises of the previous arguments. Since TCA is the first argument, it is presented against a background of ZERO contingent factual claims or assumptions. On Swinburne's approach, we literally start from scratch. The ONLY … [Read more...]

Cosmos Reboot with Neil deGrasse Tyson

The TV series Cosmos (of Carl Sagan fame) has been rebooted, this time with astrophysicist Neil deGrasse Tyson as the host.What do Intelligent Design (ID) theorists have to say about it? Here's Uncommon Descent's review. (TL;DR: they're unhappy with the "materialistic message.")Did you watch it? If so, let us know what you thought in the comments below! … [Read more...]

Swinburne’s Cosmological and Teleological Arguments – Part 2

Like many other liberals, I'm delighted and mesmerized by Bridgegate and various other Chris Christie scandals from the fine state of New Jersey. I cannot wait for my daily dose of Rachel Maddow dishing the latest dirt on Christie and his idiotic crowd of corrupt New Jersey hooligans.What does this have to do with Swinburne's arguments for God? Well, one neat trick that a couple of Christie's friends have pulled is to plead the 5th amendment as a legal justification for refusing to turn … [Read more...]

Swinburne’s Cosmological & Teleological Arguments

I'm not going to try to fully explain and evaluate Swinburne's Cosmological and Teleological arguments for God here. That would be way too much to tackle in one or two blog posts. There are just a couple of doubts or concerns about these arguments that I would like to express and explore.Swinburne's inductive cosmological argument for God has just one premise:e. A complex physical universe exists (over a period of time). Therefore: g. God exists.Swinburne argues that e is more … [Read more...]


CLOSE | X

HIDE | X