The Dawn Treader

Dr. Paul Nelson has a tongue-in-cheek post on the power of tilde.   Tilde ( pronounced "TILL-duh") is one of these thingies inside the quote marks " ~ ".  In logic, it means negation (that is, "it is not the case that").

Nelson demonstrates that this innocous looking character can magically transform the epistemological status of an entire proposition.  It can instantly turn a proposition from a scientific claim into a religious one.  That is a cool trick.  Watch.

Take the proposition: all organisms on Earth share a common ancestor.

Clearly a scientific proposition.

Now,

~ ( All organisms on Earth share a common ancestor. )

Meaning, it is not the case that all organisms on Earth share a common ancestor.

Voila, a religious, therefore, completely subjective claim ;-)

Jeff and Lisa Hintz from Bonduel, which is near Green Bay, have won state lottery games five times in five weeks.  What luck!

Or, is it...

They say it's luck, but state Rep. David Cullen wants a state audit to see if it's something more than that. He plans to make a formal request this week.

When does luck begin to become a flimsy explanation for an unlikely occurrence?

Kind of reminds me of some previous discussions on the Dawn Treader.  ;-)

(HT: William Dembski)

The supporters of Darwin are making a big mistake, imo.  All of the controversy swirling around Darwin's theory give them a golden opportunity to defend their theory and generate some interest in science in this country.  They need to seize on this opportunity rather than fight it.

Richard Gallagher, editor of Scientist magazine, agrees with me.

"The current frenzied attack on the teaching of evolution in public schools in school boards across the United States is to be welcomed.

There, I've said it. And no, I'm not a fundamental Christian, a creationist, or a right-wing ideologue. What I am is someone who sees an outstanding opportunity to exchange views with the naysayers, and a rare public examination of a set of ideas that are pretty much taken as Gospel ¬ sorry for the blurring of metaphors, but it drives home my point ¬ by us in the scientific community. Played the right way, everyone ¬ yes, including scientists ¬ should come out enriched by the interaction."

He is one of the few Darwin defenders who sees the potential available in vigorous debate.  The current party line  strategy of  calling ID stupid, labeling ID as religion instead of science, and suppressing dissent will ultimately backfire, imo.    Suppressing opposition through legal power never plays well with the American public.

Encourage critical thinking.  Invite debate.  Get the arguments on the table.  Get our youth involved.  Teach the controversy.   It is win-win.

Tom notified me that Derbyshire was at it again. Once again Derb demonstrates his cluelessness about intelligent design. The problem is, however, that apparently his critics are clueless about ID too … assuming the emails that Derb smacks down are truly representative of his critics.