Jerry Fodor and Massimo Piattelli-Palmarini wrote a book about evolution riddled with mistakes called out by biologists. Now they're pretending their critics are faceless nobodies with suspect credentials.

Creationists attack evolution with a hydra of bad faith arguments and logical fallacies. Trying to counter them using the bandwagon fallacy is only playing into their hands.

Small, simple robots are making amazing leaps and bounds in evolving behavior similar to that of living things. But why? And how?

While we strive to avoid contaminating alien worlds with our toughest germs, what if it's not only inevitable, but could actually lead to some good over the eons?

After several years of sustained pushback, you'd think that creationists would find a new strategy. But they're nothing if not consistent and deaf to criticism...

DARPA's new moonshot experiment sounds like a recipe for invincible monsters straight out of a B horror movie.

For all the time we've spent admiring, sexualizing, and thinking about breasts, we still haven't figured out how and why they evolved.

Turns out, insects have basic forms of intelligence and the path to thinking robots may be through emulating how their tiny minds work.

New evidence for venomous dinosaurs is beginning to emerge and we think we have our first example.

If you ever wanted to see dinosaurs fighting for their lives and see their anatomy at work, Clash of the Dinosaurs is the show for you.

If you ask Raymond Tallis, he will start off some very valid critiques about the use of functional MRI to map the brain, and end up regurgitating creationist talking points.

Since Dembski considered it beneath him to answer my design question, someone else tries to take a shot at them.

A few questions for the Great Creationist Information Theory Wizard William Albert Dembski about the design of the human body and genome.

Dennis Sewell is back, and this time with an entire book lazily recycling the worst and most thoroughly debunked arguments against evolution and Darwin's work and impact on science.

Science writer Nicholas Wade makes the bold claim that belief in the supernatural is genetic but his reasoning and examples fail to live up to the hype.