Casey Luskin

Over the years I've heard just about every attack on intelligent design (ID) that you can imagine. The amusing irony is that quite frequently the attacks are directly contradictory!

Last month I commented on a paper in Science which claimed to find Precambrian bilaterian animal fossils (see here here here , and here ). In my

First Things is a thoughtful ecumenical magazine for Christians and Jews of various stripes, that, many years ago, was very open to publishing material from a pro-intelligent design (ID) perspective.

Professor Kuebler uses a classical argument for common descent, citing the universality of the genetic code which he calls “probably the best piece of evidence for universal common descent” (p. 107). Here's what Kuebler writes:

To skip to the punchline, Kuebler says that “species as distantly related as humans and mice share a huge array of synteny blocks.”

A couple years ago I reported on some of Jim Tour's debates and how they raise the question of how non-experts can determine who is right during complex scientific debates. As I explained, a few years ago,

Professor Kuebler doesn't acknowledge this pattern of explosions in the fossil record, but he does cite the supposed transitional form “ Tiktaalik .” Here's what he says:

The lead author is John Hawks, a professor of anthropology at the University of Wisconsin–Madison, who has a popular — and often very insightful —

In my previous post , I documented how it was not “out of context” to quote the paper Hawks et al. (2000) stating that the paleoanthropology evidence shows a sudden or non-gradual origin of humanity.

A 2026 paper reports on an AI trained on genomic data, including data from a 2024 paper, enabling it to predict when transcription would be initiated.