If you have trouble reading this, please click http://www.freedomofresearch.org/bulletin-number-24-May-2011 World Congress for Freedom of Scientific Research the bulletin Number 24, May 2011 The Non-Epistemology of Intelligent Design: Its Implications for Public Policy – A comment by Barbara Forrest. The New York Times has recently reported about a thorny case of censorship on Intelligent Design in
If you have trouble reading this, please click http://www.freedomofresearch.org/sites/default/files/freedom24.html World Congress for Freedom of Scientific Research the bulletin Number 24, May 2011 The Non-Epistemology of Intelligent Design: Its Implications for Public Policy – A comment by Barbara Forrest. The New York Times has recently reported about a thorny case of censorship on Intelligent Design in
In April 2009, my article, “The Non-Epistemology of Intelligent Design: Its Implications for Public Policy,” was published online in a special issue of the journal Synthese (see http://www.springerlink.com/content/w76403r4w2226v34/). I examine the epistemological problems of intelligent design creationism and their implications for public policy, chiefly analyzing the writings of philosopher Francis Beckwith. Beckwith argues that teaching
Research with human Embryonic Stem Cells (hESCs) faces challenges not only in labs but also in courts. During the summer of 2010, a US federal court barred the NIH from distributing money to fund research with hESCs. The case, Sherley v. Sebelius, revolved around the claim that the Dickey-Wicker Amendment, which prohibits using of federal
by Alessandro De Luca
by Alessandro De Luca
by Pietro Migliorati
