Skip navigation.
The Critic's Resource on AntiEvolution

news aggregator

Scientific Reasons to Reject an Atheistic Worldview: Exploring TrueU with Mike Keas

ID the Future - Fri, 2014-05-09 14:37
Listen Now. On this episode of ID the Future, Casey Luskin interviews CSC senior fellow Dr. Mike Keas, author and expert on science pedagogy. Dr. Keas discusses True U, a worldview curriculum aimed at high school and college students....
Categories: Anti-Science News

The Universe Next Door with Tom Woodward: Michael Flannery on Alfred Russel Wallace

ID the Future - Fri, 2014-05-09 14:37
Listen Now. On this episode of ID the Future, hear a talk between Professor Michael Flannery and Dr. Tom Woodward on the radio program The Universe Next Door on one of the most important, and often overlooked, figures in...
Categories: Anti-Science News

Is Earth's Apparent Design for Life Simply the "Most Severe Case of Observational Bias in the History of Science"?

Astrobiologist David Waltham claims that the only explanation we need to explain our infinite good fortune is anthropic selection or observer bias. Michael Denton
Categories: Anti-Science News

In South Carolina, Students May Soon Critique Natural Selection

It should be uncontroversial for students to construct scientific arguments that support and discredit natural selection as the sole or major engine of evolution. Joshua Youngkin
Categories: Anti-Science News

Has the Problem of Science Censorship at Ball State University Been Ironed Out at Last?

With "closed-door meetings and private assurances that are never revealed," says Discovery Institute's John West, "That's news to me that anything has been resolved." David Klinghoffer
Categories: Anti-Science News

NSF Study on Green Algae Finds Darwin Was Wrong About Competition

This is huge! What will our friends at the National Censor for Science Education do now? Evolution News & Views
Categories: Anti-Science News

Meyer in Seattle: See Stephen Meyer in a Panel Discussion on Origins, Friday Night at University Presbyterian Church

The title of the event: "Intelligent Design or Evolutionary Creation?" We recommend registering. Evolution News & Views
Categories: Anti-Science News

In an Apocalyptic Mood, Stephen Hawking Overestimates the Evolutionary Future of Smart Machines

The human mind isn't a computer program, though there's never a dearth of people happy to promulgate that view. Erik J. Larson
Categories: Anti-Science News

Et Tu, Octopus? It Was Hard Enough to Explain Human Eyes by Unguided Processes

"Exactly how such convergent evolution arises is not always clear." Is it ever? Evolution News & Views
Categories: Anti-Science News

For Neil Tyson and Cosmos, Serious Scientific Controversies Are All a Thing of the Past

Whatever you believe about the origin of humans or the future of climate change, dissent deserves to be heard. Casey Luskin
Categories: Anti-Science News

The Green War on Africans

The throttling of African development is a cruel example of anti-human environmental activism. Wesley J. Smith
Categories: Anti-Science News

What Is a Mind? More Hype from Big Data

Artificial Intelligence -- specifically, "Strong Artificial Intelligence" (Strong AI) -- is a thesis about the capabilities of machines, and equally a commentary on the nature of mind. Erik J. Larson
Categories: Anti-Science News

Host a Worldwide Simulcast with Lennox, Meyer and Metaxas on "Science and Faith: Are They Really in Conflict?"

Readers of ENV have often asked us what they can do to advance a positive, thoughtful and scientifically responsible message. This is your answer! Evolution News & Views
Categories: Anti-Science News

In a Ninth Episode, Marred by the Now Familiar Rigid Ideology, Cosmos Tackles Geology and Climate

The contested hypothetical details of the Permian-Triassic Extinction get flattened into a narrative as certain and uncontroversial as a timeline of World War II. Jay W. Richards
Categories: Anti-Science News

The War on Meat Is Part of the War on Humans

I don't mind if people go vegan or vegetarian. That's a personal decision demonstrating our exceptionalism as human beings. Wesley J. Smith
Categories: Anti-Science News

Helping an Internet Debater Defend Intelligent Design

We receive lots of e-mail inquiries from people seeking information on ID, often because they want to respond to objections from critics. Casey Luskin
Categories: Anti-Science News

The Sagacity of Emma Darwin

In a review of Roger Scruton's new book, Laura Keynes commends the wisdom of her ancestor, Mrs. Darwin. David Klinghoffer
Categories: Anti-Science News

Facebook: n > 60,000

A milestone: there are now over 60,000 fans of NCSE's Facebook page. Why not join them, by visiting the page and becoming a fan by clicking on the "Like" box by NCSE's name?

Categories: Pro-Science News

Uncommonly Dense Thread 5

AE Public Forum - Fri, 2014-05-09 14:20
Post by Bob O'H
Quote (sparc @ May 09 2014,03:36)Even without extremities gpuccio will still call it a draw:
  Quote 17 JLAfan2001 May 8, 2014 at 7:27 am

19% functional is long cry from 80%.
  Quote 18 gpuccio May 8, 2014 at 7:38 am

OK, but the ENCODE data still show activity for 80% of DNA. Nothing has changed. We will see how much of that is confirmed as functional in independent ways. Science must be patient.

edited to correct links and spacing
There's a nice review of the case for "junk DNA" in PLOS Genetics, which I'm sure won't be mis-interpreted by 'news' at all.
Categories: AE Public BB

A Separate Thread for Gary Gaulin

AE Public Forum - Fri, 2014-05-09 14:07
Post by GaryGaulin
Quote (Wesley R. Elsberry @ May 08 2014,22:18)Gary:

I think that it is rude to demand a citation from someone who is only explaining how Watson works.


Of course there is no mention by star of "temporal correlation" being "the way Watson works" you are the lunkhead who mentioned it.


Here's how you can derive "causation" from Big Data: suppose you have two "factors", call them X and Y. You know, based on data, that X is correlated with Y. But you don't know whether X causes Y, Y causes X, or whether there is no causal relation between them. One example of how they can be correlated, but for which there is no causal relation is if there is a THIRD factor Z that causes both of them. You can render these possibilities as graphical models as:

X --> Y,

X <-- Y, and

X <-- Z --> Y

How can you decide which one it is? Well, you can disentangle the first two, in some cases, through temporal knowledge. e.g. Usually, X --> Y implies that X precedes Y; but the converse is not true. So, you can do some temporal reasoning to eliminate possibilities. And there are other ways to separate them; for example, you can mine text, and look to see how people speak about the relationship between X and Y. Individuals are maybe not to be trusted, but high-quality sources are -- and individuals, in aggregate, are, in some cases (and, you can even do deeper modeling and figure out when they are and when they aren't).

Now what about the third possibility? Well, you need some candidate Zs to work with. And how can you find those? Again, this is where data-mining comes in: you go to the web, and look for co-occurrence of (X,Y) with other factors Z. Once you've located a set of possible Z's, then you need to determine whether the third possibility holds. You can, for instance, ELIMINATE the third case, again, using temporal reasoning. And you can do even more elaborate things.

Gary, what "star0" discusses above *is* temporal correlation. The 2003 Nobel Prize in Economics went to Clive Granger, in part for his development of temporal correlation as the basis for his causality test. What "star0" did not assert was that IBM's "Watson" uses temporal correlation for detecting causality. In fact, "star0" makes no claim at all about any method that "Watson" might be using in the entirety of that post.

To sum up: "star0" does discuss temporal correlation, but does not discuss "Watson" in that post (thus "star0" was not "explaining how Watson works", at least not in the post Gary quoted and I was referring to).

Gary is 0 for 2.

"Lunkhead", when used by Gary, means "perceptive".
Explaining how Watson works was in a number of their threads. That information came from just one of them. This one does maybe go into more than what Watson has but I would not be surprised by it already having that as well.

Star0 used the phrase "temporal reasoning" when talking about "causation" and I'm not sure whether they would agree that "temporal correlation" is a direct substitute. It might be, but in this case the question is why David Ferrucci said “People are so enamored with the data-driven approach that they believe correlation is sufficient."

This evening I'll have some time to go over your leads.

And "lunkhead" was to go with earlier reply about it sometimes getting like Three Stooges in this thread. It's a bit of humor without personal insult like I was responding to that you hurled at me.
Categories: AE Public BB
Syndicate content