A review of the book, The Tinkerer's Accomplice, How Design Emerges from Life Itself. Mutation and selection are not sufficient to explain evolution, and another factor, homeostasis, should also be considered. Published in Origins, n. 62.

A review of the book, The Edge of Evolution: The Search for the Limits of Darwinism. Darwinian mechanisms may permit limited adjustment to living conditions, but there have not been enough events in the history of organisms for random mutations to construct complex adaptations. Changes in species are often due to broken genes rather than to new improvements, and intelligent design is necessary to explain complex adaptations. Published in Origins, n. 62.

A review of the book, Darwin's Nemesis: Phillip Johnson and the Intelligent Design Movement. Published in Origins n. 61.

A review of the book, Compositional Evolution: The Impact of Sex, Symbiosis, and Modularity on the Gradualistic Framework of Evolution. Published in Origins, n. 61.

Reactions comprising the nitrogen cycle are catalyzed by complex protein machines, some of which may be Irreducibly Complex (IC). Published in Origins n. 60.

A review of the book Why Is a Fly Not a Horse? Published in Origins n. 60.

The debate raging around ID is not one of scientific fact versus religious faith. The real clash is an ideological one in which scientists are seeking to maintain the intellectual and cultural dominance of the humanist/atheist worldview.

In this article, we will review the contemporary status of the design theory and examine some of the major criticisms leveled against it.

Three claims have been made that, if true, might suggest that scientists should be wary of intelligent design.... What is the status of these claims? Published in Origins n. 59.

This article explores the usefulness of the idea of intelligent design in the context of modern (scientific) efforts to understand nature. Among the questions to be considered are whether intelligent design is a necessary inference from the properties of nature, and whether its incorporation into science would improve our ability to explore and understand nature.

Is God real? Is the Bible true? What about all those amazing stories in the Bible? Specifically, what about the Genesis stories? Did God really create the world and all that is in it in a literal week? Did that Creation occur only some 10,000 years ago? How could all these biblical accounts be true when so many brilliant scientists advocate otherwise?

Charles Darwin's theory of natural selection was inspired not primarily by his observations of the natural world, but by Thomas Malthus's theory of scarcity.

Review of Why Intelligent Design Fails: A Scientific Critique of the New Creationism. Published in Origins n. 58.

Review of the book, Thinking About God: First Steps in Philosophy. Published in Origins n. 58.

Ever since it was discovered in 1861, Archaeopteryx lithographica has been a controversial fossil. Its remarkable finding has provided certain credibility to Darwin’s theory of evolution. Archaeopteryx has a mixture of characteristics found in birds, reptiles, and theropod dinosaurs, and for that reason, scientists are divided regarding its origin, flight capacity, and position in the alleged evolutionary sequence from reptiles to birds.

Poor design in Rubisco can now be added to the growing list of failed Darwinian arguments from ignorance.

The argument to design is that nature shows evidence of design but does not attempt to identify the designer. The argument from design is that the design seen in nature is best explained as the result of a specific designer, most often the Christian God. Published in Origins n. 57.

In this article, the multivariate technique of classical multidimensional scaling is introduced to baraminology. Published in Origins n. 57.

A review of the book, The Case for a Creator: A Journalist Investigates Scientific Evidence That Points Toward God. Published in Origins, n. 57.

Whenever religion and science have a dispute about some question of fact, religion always loses. So goes a common belief. The implication is that religion should never make any factual claims, as it has no contact with reality. For some religions, such an assertion is irrelevant, as these religions do not make any claims about the physical universe. But for biblical Christianity, such an assertion would be fatal.