The Panda’s Thumb

When smart people believe stupid things

2026-10-11T19:30:00-07:00

This sculpture, image from Wikimedia, is based on an image from a Japanese temple. It is
often called the Three Wise Monkeys. who neither hear, see or speak evil. Image posted by
Joe Felsenstein, who asks whether the people discussed in this article believe that
they are being wise.

A penpal of mine, Scott Goodman, recently asked the following question:

What is the psychology behind contrarian belief systems? Having been involved in this now for some 30 years, I have concluded, as have others, that this phenomenon of latching on to a nonsense belief and defending it to the death against all reason is, at its root, psychologically and emotionally driven. And it certainly isn’t limited to creationism. Across the board, from climate change denial to anti-vaccine hysteria to insisting that elections are rigged, I believe the same thing is at work. Consider the characteristics:

Impervious to facts or logic. The facts simply must be wrong.

A desire to focus on the best and most robust scientific (or political) explanations.

Along with that, attacking the most prominent scientists; Darwin, Einstein, etc.

And several other characteristics that one might describe.

I throw this out to the group because it might point to finding more effective ways of combatting all of this nonsense. Clearly, facts are water off a duck’s back to creationists and other science deniers. They have a mental force field to keep facts and logic out. To me the question becomes, “What is the emotional payoff for this behaviour?” It appears to be overwhelming and compelling for those who adopt this way of thinking.

A psychiatrist, to whom the question was originally directed, responded:

TBH, I don’t know if I have a good answer to this question, even though it is at least adjacent to my field of expertise. But I do have thoughts.

It is easy to presume that we, as a species, are motivated to seek the truth because we are unusually good at finding the truth. However, it is more likely that we, like every other organism possessed of a degree of sentience, are primarily motivated to do whatever feels good. If that results in beliefs that align with reality, fine. But beliefs do not necessarily align with reality.

I wonder if some of us get an unusual amount of pleasure from learning what is true, and that this overrides whatever discomfort or displeasure accompanies this knowledge. This may not be the case for creationists and other denialists, for whom abandoning their false beliefs exacts a psychological cost they are not motivated to pay.

I’ve become a bit cynical in my time engaging in this debate, having seen so few people ever change their position despite having enough intelligence and knowledge to understand why they are wrong, and being presented evidence by people who are able to communicate very effectively.

At this point, I don’t think the priority is to convince people to change their minds. Rather, it ought to be to get denialists out of positions of influence and power – and keep them out. That is particularly the case in the US at this time.

Biologist John Harshman noted,

All the people I know personally, or online, who were de-programmed from creationism began by studying science and noticing that creationism (that is, biblical literalism) didn’t make sense when compared to the data. Obviously this doesn’t work for everyone, since, e.g., Kurt Wise is still a creationist.

John Wilkins, a philosopher of biology, recommended his article, Are Creationists Rational?, of which I reproduce the abstract:

Creationism is usually regarded as an irrational set of beliefs. In this paper I propose that the best way to understand why individual learners settle on any mature set of beliefs is to see that as the developmental outcome of a series of “fast and frugal” boundedly rational inferences rather than as a rejection of reason. This applies to those whose views are opposed to science in general. A bounded rationality model of belief choices both serves to explain the fact that folk traditions tend to converge on “anti-modernity”, and to act as a default hypothesis, deviations from which we can use to identify other, arational, influences such as social psychological, economic and individual dispositions. I propose some educational and public policy strategies that might decrease the proportion of learners who find creationism and anti-science in general a rational choice.

And chemist Paul Braterman offered this reference:

Stephan Lewandowski and colleagues have put together a great deal of work about dealing with disinformation, e.g., The Debunking Handbook, 2020, with over a hundred references. It becomes much more difficult when the erroneous belief is part of an individual’s identity, such as beliefs linked to religion (as creationism invariably is, apart from a few philosophers), or tribal loyalty, as in the collective rejection of elitism, including scientific authority.

I will leave further discussion to the Comments.

Not exactly a salmon

2026-10-05T11:00:00-07:00

Photograph of reddish growth along the edge of Boulder Creek, taken with a cell phone,
August, 2026. Seek, by iNaturalist, identified it as Oncorhynchus nerka – sockeye salmon.
Clearly it is not that. Is it some kind of algae? See below the fold ....

... A second photograph taken at the same time with a proper camera at a longish focal length and a shutter speed fast enough to freeze the water. It seems likely that they are tree roots, probably willow (salix sp.). See here for a post with comments by Roy Lawrence.

Marmota flaviventer

2026-09-21T11:00:00-07:00

Photography Contest.

C Joseph Long, Honorable Mention.

Marmota flaviventer – yellow-bellied marmot. Mr. Long writes, "On Trail Ridge Road, Rocky Mountain National Park, Colorado, at about the 3570 m (11,700 ft) level, June 2026."

Williamstown secret deal may get a free fire station for the Ark

2026-09-20T09:00:00-07:00

PVA property plot of the possible future Williamstown fire station. Note that it is surrounded by Ark property and only accessible via the Ark’s service road.

Will the Ark Park get a free fire station from the City of Williamstown? Is the Ark going to announce a Tower of Babel ride soon (and get more tax incentives)?

Back on January 8, 2026, the acting Mayor of Williamstown, Kentucky, Dave Henson, had a special meeting/luncheon with Ken Ham and several Answers in Genesis/Ark Encounter officers on the Ark Encounter property. I submitted a Kentucky Open Records Act (KORA) request to Williamstown and received a handful of documents including photographs of the Mayor with Ken Ham and the meeting agenda. The meeting agenda briefly mentions a discussion of a “Fire Department substation” on Eibeck Lane (the employees’ and delivery entrance to the Ark) but nothing specific. Since this wasn’t considered a City Council meeting, nothing appeared to be official.

In early August, I noticed a record in the Grant County News where Ark Development, LLC (an Answers in Genesis shell company) had sold the City of Williamstown an ~1.9 acre property on Eibeck Road for $1. This piqued my curiosity, and I sent a KORA request to the City on August 3, 2026. On August 7, 2026, before the City responded to my open records request, I visited Williamstown in person to look up the exact location and take a photo of the site.

My visit to the County Clerk’s and PVA (Property Evaluation Administrator) offices revealed the exact location of the property on Eibeck Lane. The property is surrounded by Ark Encounter property and is on the Ark’s “employee and delivery entrance” located on the Ark’s private access road. To avoid trespassing, I stopped before entering the Ark’s property and photographed the property from a distance. My photo is attached. Also attached is a Google Maps image showing a pin for the location of the front of the property. You presently cannot access the property without trespassing on Ark property.

On August 11, 2026, I received the KORA package from the City. It revealed that the property is valued at $10,000. The deed records show that the Ark sold the property to Williamstown on March 8, 2018, for $1. Then on July 7, 2022, the City sold the property back to the Ark for $1. Then, on April 23, 2026, the City bought the property again for $1.

There is only one discussion of the property in the minutes of the Williamstown City Council on May 17, 2022 (more than 4 years ago). At this meeting the topic of “Returning of Property Back to Ark that was Supposed to be used for Fire Substation” was discussed. The record states that “Mayor Skinner stated the property was donated to the City in 2012 [he could be mistaken about the date given the deeds provided in the KORA – d.p.] for the purpose of a Fire Substation. Mayor Skinner stated that he and Fire Chief Les Whalen think it is not the proper location for a substation. Some discussion [not recorded – d.p.] occurred.” It then states “Ronnie West made the motion to return the property back to the Ark that was supposed to be used for a Fire Substation. Greg Middleton seconded the motion…. All voted in favor.” And the motion carried.

There is no other information concerning these property transfers in the KORA material I received.

When acting Mayor Henson and the Williamstown City Council have their public meetings, they often go into closed session. The meeting agendas then usually state, “Motion to go into Executive Session pursuant to KRS 61.810(1)(g) discussions regarding a business entity concerning a specific proposal as open discussions would jeopardize the citing, retention or upgrading of the business.”

The full text of KRS 61.810(1)(g) can be found here.

So far this year, the Williamstown City Council meetings have cited KRS 61.810(1)(g) in their agendas on February 2, March 2, May 19, June 1, July 6, July 21, and September 8 (seven times this year). (See all of the Williamstown City Council meeting Agendas here). According to the Kentucky Open Government Coalition website, Kentucky government agencies cannot take final action or vote on binding measures during a closed session. Any formal decision or vote must occur during the open, public portion of the meeting.

The Executive Sessions could be discussing other business entities but given the importance of the Ark to Williamstown politicians and the scarcity of other businesses interested in Williamstown, that is unlikely. Other possible business that the City of Williamstown has been dealing with includes selling/leasing an old gym, a warehouse, and a building formerly owned by Northern Kentucky University. Thus, a minority of the closed sessions could be devoted to these other projects. However, since there is no public record concerning the purchase of the Eibeck Lane property from AIG, some, perhaps a majority, of these closed sessions involve the City and AIG’s interests.

Was the vote, if any, to repurchase the property this year for $1 done in one of these secret “Executive Sessions”? Or was the property somehow purchased without a vote? Was any due diligence conducted to inspect the site for possible environmental or other liabilities? Why is no public record available?

I contacted a reporter from the Grant County News about this matter. She said that Mayor Henson told her, “The property was originally deeded to the City when the Ark Encounter project was initiated, with the intention that it could serve as the site of a future fire department substation. Because the City did not move forward with that use at the time, the property was deeded back to the Ark Encounter. The City is now considering the property for a possible future fire department substation and potentially a training facility. In January, I [the Mayor] asked representatives of the Ark Encounter to deed the property back to the City, and they were pleased to accommodate that request.” There is no public record of the City purchasing this property other than the deed. Everything else was apparently done in secret. Even the cancelled check for $1.00 was not provided to my KORA request.

There is no public record of the decision to reacquire the property, and no vote, no discussion of why it was deemed to not be suitable for a fire station in 2022 (but suddenly the property is or might be suitable in 2026).

Questions for the Mayor and City Council of Williamstown include:

Is Williamstown going to build a fire station on the property or not?
If not, what are the plans for the property since it is landlocked by Ark property?
Since it is surrounded by Ark property, which is private, how can the city and its residents possibly make use of that property?
There is no record of any public vote on reacquiring the property. Why?

Interestingly enough, AIG probably could easily raise its own funds to build their own fire station without getting the City to build it or finance it any way. In spite of declining ticket sales, the Ark is afloat in cash from donations. As I write this, Ken Ham has announced a $24 million fundraiser. A day and a half after the announcement, the multi-month fundraiser has already raised more than $2.4 million.

I have long predicted that when the Kentucky Tourism Sales Tax rebate expires, the Ark will change from a for-profit to a non-profit entity to avoid the monthly 50 cents per ticket Safety Fee to Williamstown. In spite of this likelihood, could the City now be planning to construct a firehouse, at City expense, on this property surrounded by Ark property? The Ark has a long record of getting one perk after another from sympathetic government entities. What is the town going to do to replace the per-ticket fee if the Ark becomes a non-profit?

The repeated “Executive Sessions” suggest extensive discussions with Williamstown concerning a proposal with a business entity. Since Crosswater Canyon (the for-profit AIG shell company that enabled the Ark to receive sales tax rebate incentives from Kentucky Tourism) has now received the last of the tax rebate money, perhaps AIG is going ahead with other projects. AIG has discussed “recreating” the Tower of Babel as a ride and/or movie theater since way back when the Ark was in its planning stages. It has been several years since Ken Ham discussed adding a “Tower of Babel” onto the Ark Encounter property. In his 2022 discussion, Ham says, “This project is still several years out, and will require much planning, design work, budgeting, fundraising, Kentucky tourism & permit approvals, etc. long before we formally announce we are moving ahead and can break ground.”

I would not be surprised if there is an attempt to get the Kentucky Tourism Commission to grant new tax incentives for the Tower of Babel “recreation.” In fact, this could explain the odd and possibly misleading presentation that representatives of the Ark made to a Kentucky Legislative Committee on Tourism back in July. At that meeting, the Ark was inexplicably praised as an economic dynamo for Kentucky whereas ticket sales have never matched the Ark’s projections and are, in fact, declining. That meeting may have been a way to soften up Kentucky officials for further breaks for AIG enterprises.

Another possibility is that AIG is waiting for a new Governor, of either party, who would be more likely to back a project with ties to Christian Nationalism. Members of the Legislature from Northern Kentucky are dominated by conservative, Christian Nationalists. Governor Andy Beshear’s term will end in December, 2027. Ken Ham has attacked Beshear repeatedly on Facebook and other social media for the Governor’s positions on social issues and has repeatedly complained that the Governor has never visited the Ark or Creation Museum.

Publisher recalls book that misquotes Michael Behe

2026-09-13T20:00:00-07:00

A report in Retraction Watch, University press removes book about intelligent design for misquoting ID proponent, reported, “New York University Press is pulling all copies of a book about intelligent design after the author falsely quoted another scholar in the work.” The book is Designer Science: A History of Intelligent Design in America, by C.W. Howell. I was slightly taken aback by the word falsely, where inaccurately might have held less baggage. At any rate, Retraction Watch says,

The misquote stemmed from a passage in a court ruling Howell “mistakenly” read as a direct quote from Behe and attributed as such, he told us. Howell writes about the intersection of faith and science, and serves as an academic director for the C.S. Lewis Foundation.

The book has been pulled from the market and does not appear on Amazon. The Press will presumably reissue the book after the error has been corrected. I consider that beyond principled: I consider the the misquotation a minor error (all books have errors, even mine). I would have treated it like an error in a published paper and simply issued an erratum, posted the erratum on the publisher’s and my web pages, and probably tried to get Amazon to follow suit.

Though not listed on Amazon, the book is still listed in Publishers Weekly, which gave it a favorable but not starred review. Curious, I looked it up and skimmed the Introduction. It is well and clearly written, and notes that the damage done by intelligent-design creationism is still with us:

While ID’s community of supporters is still active–especially on the internet–in the media and culture at large, it is generally perceived today as defunct, and virtually all prior scholarly work on intelligent design ends with the Dover case from 2005. But intelligent design did not disappear. This book makes the case that its legacy is far more significant than we might think. Even though it did fail to achieve its goal of remaking contemporary science, intelligent design both planted the seeds and nurtured the growth of extreme skepticism in the world of US conservatism, a trend that has continued to grow ever since, sprouting in contemporary antivaccine movements and climate change denialism, among other things. We are all grappling today with intelligent design’s legacy, even when we are not directly talking about its serious intellectual content and its highly technical scientific attacks on Darwin.

After observing that he is closest to a theistic evolutionist, Howell, a historian with a PhD from Duke University, says,

... I have tried my best to present ID in a critical but fair light–not to disprove it (or prove it) but simply to understand it and its supporters. It is my hope that this book will, to appropriate Darwin’s phrase about origins, “throw light” on a movement that exerted, and still does exert, great influence on life in the US and that it will help illuminate the beliefs, politics, and effects of ID such as they were and are in the late twentieth and early twenty-first century.

I will look forward to this book when it is finally reissued.

Loxodonta cyclotis

2026-09-07T11:00:00-07:00

Photography Contest.

Joel Eissenberg, Honorable Mention.

Loxodonta cyclotis – African elephant. Dr. Eissenberg writes, "Image taken at Roger Williams Park Zoo in Providence RI. Elephants have wrinkled skin composed of a dense network of fractures that helps them survive in hot climates. The deep creases form a web of microvalleys that trap moisture, allowing their skin to retain up to ten times more water than a smooth surface. This trapped moisture cools them through evaporation."

Ken Ham's attack on the press

2026-09-05T18:36:00-07:00

The "Ark" on opening day. Photograph by Dan Phelps.

Recently, Marina Johnson of the Louisville Courier-Journal and Jolene Almendarez of the Cincinnati Enquirer duplicated some of my work and documented declining Ark ticket sales (they confirmed what I have been documenting for many months. They also confirmed that the sales tax rebate incentive from Kentucky Tourism ended in mid-August, 2026).

Tellingly, Ken Ham refused to be interviewed for this story. Rather, on August 25, Mr. Ham responded with an AIG-produced video. The video is filled with “jokes” and brief cuts of Donald Trump.

Apparently, Mr. Ham doesn’t like speaking to reporters who might ask him difficult questions. Mr. Ham spent more time in this video discussing declining newspaper sales than the fact that his Ark is selling fewer tickets every year. He basically admitted that ticket sales are declining but deflected the issue by pointing out that the newspaper that originally published the story (the Cincinnati Enquirer) has declining sales. Mr. Ham is such a master of obfuscation that his followers are likely to not understand the deceitful and irrelevant switch in topics.

Ark Attendance through July 2026

According to my monthly Kentucky Open Records Act (KORA) request, in July 2026 the Ark sold 105,911 tickets. This is approximately 1,700 more than were sold in July 2025, but far less than July of any other year except 2020 (which is easily attributable to COVID).

Although there was a tiny increase in July, these numbers indicate that the Ark will never come near the 1.2 to 2.2 million projected by Answers in Genesis when they were begging and bullying to get numerous perks from Kentucky State Government, Grant County, and the City of Williamstown. To the contrary, they could possibly sell 700,000 tickets this year (the Ark sold 652,342 tickets in 2025). These attendance numbers don’t include children under 10 and lifetime pass holders, but it is difficult to see how these additional factors would total more than a half-million additional visitors.

These declining numbers matter because the Ark lied to the Commonwealth of Kentucky, Grant County, Williamstown, and others when they were bullying these entities into providing incentives, free land, tax breaks, and many other perks when the Ark was first proposed. William Trollinger has documented that in the Ark’s own feasibility study when it was yet to be built, the theme park would be getting around 2.5 million visitors per year by now. (See also here.

I am still predicting that in coming months the Ark will switch from for-profit status to non-profit because the tax rebate incentives are ending. This will result in a financial loss for the City of Williamstown, which gets a 50 cents per ticket safety fee for each ticket the Ark sells. This safety fee is how I monitor Ark ticket sales every month. The safety fee supports Williamstown EMT/police/fire department because of the possible effects of the Ark on these services. When the safety fee ends we will be in the dark as to ticket sales. The attendance numbers don’t include free admission for children under 10 and yearly or lifetime pass holders, as Mr. Ham asserted. However, Mr. Ham knows what the precise attendance is and could easily release his numbers, but tellingly he declines to do so. He will continue to avoid a skeptical press and merely produce propaganda for his followers.

Appendix. Ark Safety Numbers via Kentucky Open Records Act Requests from Williamstown, Ky.

Dan Phelps has doggedly been monitoring the attendance at the Ark Park since its inception in 2017. Specifically, he uses the Kentucky Open Records Act to obtain the $0.50/ticket safety fee that the Ark pays to the municipality each month and thereby estimates the total attendance. There may be one more entry for August.

2017: (July-December total 514,162)

July: 142,626 (Safety Fee amount: $71,313.00)

August: 106,161 ($53,080.50)

September: 83,330 ($41,665.00)

October: 93,659 ($46,829.50)

November: 51,914 ($25,957.00)

December: 36,472 ($18,236.00)

2018: (Total 827,591)

January: 13,250 ($6,625.00)

February: 17,961 ($8,980.50)

March: 62,251 ($31,125.50)

April: 67,613 ($33,806.50)

May: 73,353 ($36,676.50)

June: 113,901 ($56,950.50)

July: 135,922 ($67,961.00)

August: 98,106 ($49,053.00)

September: 69,207 ($34,603.50)

October: 89,434 ($44,717.00)

November: 40,193 ($20,096.50)

December: 46,400 ($24,200.00)

2019: (Total 897,189)

January: 14,885 ($7,442.50)

February: 16,328 ($8,164.00)

March 2019: 70,466 ($35,233.00)

April 2019: 79,908 ($39,554.00)

May 2019: 90,803 ($45,401.50)

June 2019: 124,230 ($62,115.00)

July 2019: 160,124 ($80,062.00)

August 2019: 104,350 ($52,175)

September 2019: 73,541 ($36,770.50)

October 2019: 86,998 ($43,494.00)

November 2019: 37,686 ($18,881)

December 2019: 37,880 ($18,940)

2020: (Total 347,684* Covid year)

January 2020: 15,790 ($7,895.00)

February 2020: 17,290 ($8,645.00)

March 2020: 15,145($7572.50)

April 2020: 0 ($0)

May 2020: 2,047 ($1,023.50)

June 2020: 40,434 ($20,217.00)

July 2020: 57,632 ($28,816.00)

August 2020: 46,562 ($23,281.00)

September 2020: 44,571 ($22,285.50)

October 2020: 49,835 ($24,917.50)

November 2020: 24,105 ($12,052.50)

December 2020: 34,273 ($17,136.50)

2021: (Total 772,156)

January 2021: 11,354 ($5,677)

February 2021: 11,577 ($5,788.50)

March 2021: 57, 801 ($28,900.50)

April 2021: 64,479 ($32,239.50)

May 2021: 76,089 ($38,044.50)

June 2021: 109,694 ($54,847)

July 2021: 134,945 ($67,472.50)

August 2021: 83,826 ($41,913.00)

September 2021: 64,301 ($32,150.50)

October 2021: 73,328 ($36,664.00)

November 2021: 44,291 ($22,145.50)

December 2021: 40,671 ($20,335.50)

2022: (Total 748,354)

January 2022: 11,030 ($5,515.00)

February 2022: 10,826 ($5,413.00)

March 2022: 59,428 ($29,714.00)

April 2022: 69,068 ($34 534.00)

May 2022: 81,378 ($40,689.00)

June 2022: 102,639 ($51,319.50)

July 2022: 110,098 ($55,049.00)

August 2022: 83,638 ($41,819.00)

September 2022: 68,301 ($34,150.50)

October 2022: 74,864 ($37,432.00)

November 2022: 39,125 ($19562.50)

December 2022: 37,959 ($18,979.50)

2023: (Total 786,829)

January 2023: 14,724 ($7,362.00)

February 2023: 23,020 ($11,510.00)

March 2023: 66,390 ($33,195.00)

April 2023: 70,700 ($35,350.00)

May 2023:82,585 ($41,292.50)

June 2023: 111,256 ($55,628.00)

July 2023: 123,777 ($61,888.50)

August 2023: 79,576 ($39,798.00)

September 2023: 66,460 ($33,230.00)

October 2023: 69,773 ($34,886.50)

November 2023: 38,768 ($19,384.00)

December 2023: 39,780 ($19,890.00)

2024: (Total 743,572)

January 2024: 13,405 ($6,702.50)

February 2024: 21,351 ($10,675.50)

March 2024: 67,582 ($33,791.00)

April 2024: 66,681 ($33,340.50)

May 2024: 75,546 ($37,773.00)

June 2024: 101,559 ($50,799.50)

July 2024: 116,908 ($58,454.00)

August 2024: 82,477 ($41,238.50)

September 2024: 54,378 ($27,189.00)

October 2024: 63,912 ($31,956.00)

November 2024: 40,572 ($20,286.00)

December 2024: 39,201 ($19,600.50)

2025: (Total 652,342)

January 2025: 17,846 ($8,923.00)

February 2025: 15,699 ($7,849.50)

March 2025: 57,337 ($28,668.50)

April 2025: 43,019 ($21,509.50)

May 2025: 59,268 ($29,634.00)

June 2025: 91,484 ($45,742.00)

July 2025: 104,136 ($52,068.00)

August 2025: 73,313 ($36,656.50)

September 2025: 53,425 ($26,712.50)

October 2025: 66,158 ($33,079.00)

November 2025: 35,434 ($17,717.50)

December 2025: 35,223 ($17,611.50)

2026

January 2026: 17,845 ($8,922.50)

February 2026: 17,326 ($8,663.00)

March 2026: 54,042 ($27,042.00 [sic - should be $27,021.00]

April 2026: 57,159 ($28,579.50)

May 2026: 67,204 ($33,602.00)

June 2026: 96,004 ($48,002.00)

July 2026: 105,911 ($53,680.50)

Megarhyssa greenei and M. atrata

2026-08-24T11:00:00-07:00

Photography Contest.

Malcolm Schongalla, Honorable Mention.

Ichneumonid wasps. Mr. Schongalla notes, "These photographs were taken June 2026 in the Northeastern US. The two wasps were laying eggs on horntail larvae in the same log, at the same time. These are 'parasitoid wasps,' also known as Darwin wasps, of the family Ichneumonidae. The lighter color wasp [above] is Megarhyssa greenei and the darker one [below] is Megarhyssa atrata. The female member of this insect family lays her eggs on or near another insect host after paralyzing it. The larva feeds on the host insect's body as it grows. Unfortunately, no larvae are visible in these pictures. The larvae are inside the log, and the wasps' long ovipositor is adapted to reaching deep into the bore holes to reach them. The wasps have, amazingly, developed ways to detect the presence of larvae deep within the wood, from the outside."

More, including the second photograph, below the fold.

He continues, “In Charles Darwin’s 1860 letter to Asa Gray, he wrote:

"I had no intention to write atheistically. But I own that I cannot see, as plainly as others do, & as I shd wish to do, evidence of design & beneficence on all sides of us. There seems to me too much misery in the world. I cannot persuade myself that a beneficent & omnipotent God would have designedly created the Ichneumonidæ with the express intention of their feeding within the living bodies of caterpillars, or that a cat should play with mice. Not believing this, I see no necessity in the belief that the eye was expressly designed. On the other hand I cannot anyhow be contented to view this wonderful universe & especially the nature of man, & to conclude that everything is the result of brute force. I am inclined to look at everything as resulting from designed laws, with the details, whether good or bad, left to the working out of what we may call chance. Not that this notion at all satisfies me. I feel most deeply that the whole subject is too profound for the human intellect. [1]
"1. Darwin, Charles. Darwin Correspondence Project, 'Letter no. 2814,' accessed on 17 June 2026, https://www.darwinproject.ac.uk/letter/?docId=letters/DCP-LETT-2814.xml."

M. atrata.

Is evolution defied because life is an “idea”?

2026-08-15T08:00:00-07:00

Kamchatka Brown Bear (Ursus arctos), By Robert F. Tobler Wikimedia CC BY-SA 4.0

Eric Hedin had a post at Science & Culture Today (The Discovery Institute’s former Evolution News) that seems to fully commit to Platonic idealism and to teleology. Which is surprising since he is a Ph.D. in particle physics, from my own University. It will be found here.

Its final two paragraphs will give you the general drift, but you should read Hedin’s post, which is short:

To imagine that each of the millions of species of living creatures on Earth “evolved” by a weeding-out process, undirected by any idea of the wholeness they would ultimately manifest, runs counter to our experience with functional design and the known limitations of the laws of nature. If prolific reproductivity is the “goal” of natural selection, why should life have ever evolved to anything beyond bacteria? Cancer cells, as a mutation from original design, would seem to be evolution’s crowning achievement.

The wholeness of living organisms testifies to their metaphysical origin as an “idea,” originating in the mind of their Maker. The evidence suggests that creatures exceed the boundaries of what is possible by undirected natural forces. Even information, as we understand it, appears to fall short as the groundwork for life. Apparently, life comes from life, and nothing else will suffice. Life is a brilliant idea!

Is there some way we can counter this argument? The title of his article is “In Defiance of Evolution, Life is an Idea”. Is evolutionary biology finally totally defied?

To see comments, click on the title of this post or on the header showing the number of comments.

Nyctibius griseus

2026-08-10T11:00:00-07:00

Photography Contest.

John Harshman, Third Place.

Nyctibius griseus – common potoo. Dr. Harshman notes that the potoo, from Ecuador, is "in his common daytime position of pretending to be the end of a broken branch." Just for the record, it is a bird.