The Unz Review - Mobile
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 Announcements
Incorporating the GNXP.Com Archives and Debunking Darwin
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments

This last weekend we migrated our website to a much more powerful server, able to handle vastly greater quantities of content material and traffic, and therefore providing plenty of room for future growth.

We immediately began making use of these extra hardware resources by importing the entire archives of Razib Khan’s old GNXP.com blogsite, which had served as a prominent center for on-line discussions of genetic expression and evolutionary biology for almost a decade before going dormant a couple of years ago. The 50,000 posts and comments, many quite long and high-quality, are now conveniently accessible at The Review, substantially augmenting the total of our existing content material. Our website now includse well over a half a million articles, posts, and comments, totaling more than 65 million words.

All of this material, including the latest addition, are fully integrated within the website architecture and functionality, being organized by Author, Date Range, Topic, and Category, with all comments and commenters cross-indexed and everything searchable via our powerful search engine. These features immediately apply to all content material that our site absorbs and although the importation of the GNXP.com content marks the first time we have acquired the archives of a full-fledged multi-author blogsite, we trust it will not be the last.

Given that the GNXP.com archives contain such a huge quantity of academic-quality material on the cutting-edges of modern evolutionary biology, I am particularly pleased to note the remarkable success this morning of Fred Reed’s latest column, sharply denouncing and debunking Darwinism.

After all, providing a balanced contra-MSM perspective is the fundamental purpose of this webzine.

 
    []
  1. Hepp says:

    Some groups deserve to be excluded from the MSM. Creationists, for example. FAQs about Darwinism can be found by anyone willing to spend two seconds on Google. We don’t need one here.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
    AgreeDisagreeLOLTroll
    These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Troll, or LOL with the selected comment. They are ONLY available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also ONLY be used once per hour.
    Sharing Comment via Twitter
    /announcement/incorporating-the-gnxp-com-archives-and-debunking-darwin/#comment-662231
    More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  2. Old fogey says:

    Many thanks for this webzine, Mr. Unz, and for bringing together interesting points of view on major topics in the sciences. Do you know the work of Rupert Sheldrake? He is vilified by today’s powers-that-be because he questions all the received wisdom in an articulate and engaging manner.

    Read More
  3. Bruce says:

    He sharply denounced Darwinism but I think it’s a bit hyperbolic to say he debunked Darwinism. Debunked Darwinism with a column!!?

    Read More
  4. jb says:

    Fred’s column is a good example of why I’ve been nervous about seeing people I respect a lot — i.e., Sailer and Khan — moving to unz.com. It’s because I’m afraid of guilt by association with some of the really bad stuff I sometimes see published here (e.g., this particular column by Fred).

    I’m also afraid of guilt by association with material that I don’t consider bad at all, but which is controversial to the point where it could be damaging. For example, I think Derbyshire’s stuff is great. But he publishes on VDARE (which is fine), so unz.com links to VDARE (um, OK), and so Razib Khan gets associated with VDARE (which isn’t so great, because Razib just isn’t a VDARE kind of guy, and the association could be used to unfairly discredit his writing). I do like the idea of collecting a wide range of ideas under on roof, but it needs to be done carefully, or it could backfire badly.

    Read More
  5. Jason B says:

    With all due respect (and there is much due), saying that Fred Reed “debunked” Darwin in that column is a breathtakingly stupid thing to say for a man with a science background and formidable intellect. I can only hope Ron Unz has been up for three days straight and has a BAC of 0.124 to be able to allow that statement in an editorial post. Denounce, yes, but a man who denounces gravity and then jumps from a cliff still falls.

    Read More
Current Commenter says:

Leave a Reply - Comments on articles more than two weeks old will be judged much more strictly on quality and tone


 Remember My InformationWhy?
 Email Replies to my Comment
Submitted comments become the property of The Unz Review and may be republished elsewhere at the sole discretion of the latter
Subscribe to This Comment Thread via RSS
Personal Classics
The major media overlooked Communist spies and Madoff’s fraud. What are they missing today?
Are elite university admissions based on meritocracy and diversity as claimed?
The unspoken statistical reality of urban crime over the last quarter century.
What Was John McCain's True Wartime Record in Vietnam?
What the facts tell us about a taboo subject
While other top brass played press agents for the administration’s war, William Odom told the truth about Iraq—though few listened.