The Critic's Resource on AntiEvolution
|Dossiers | Home | Incidents | Literature | Projects | Public BB | Topics|
|Donate | NCSE | PT | TD | TOA | Public BB Archive | PvM's Blog|
There are currently 0 users and 2 guests online.
This could make it harder to convince people that Darwinian evolution really does mix comfortably with religious belief. Casey Luskin http://www.discovery.org/p/188
If you follow Coyne's blog Why Evolution Is True, you'll know he's currently in Poland on a visit with friends. David Klinghoffer http://www.discovery.org/p/209
Listen Now. On this episode of ID the Future, hear the second part of Tom Woodward's interview with biologist Jonathan Wells on The Universe Next Door. Dr. Wells continues to explain the icons of evolution and why much of...
Listen Now. On this episode of ID the Future, Jonathan Wells is on the Universe Next Door with Tom Woodward to talk about his popular book "Icons of Evolution." Dr. Wells discusses how Darwinism has failed to explain how...
Listen Now. On this episode of ID the Future Logan Gage interviews CSC Fellow John Mark Reynolds, author of the book When Athens Met Jerusalem: An Introduction to Classical and Christian Thought. Listen in as Dr. Reynolds explains the...
Orb-weaver spiders are one of the most common types of spiders. They're the ones you find in your garden, building those beautiful big circular webs. Casey Luskin http://www.discovery.org/p/188
Meanwhile the very issue that divided the two founders of modern evolutionary theory -- the cognitive capacities of Homo sapiens -- remains unresolved by Darwinian mechanisms. Michael Flannery http://www.discovery.org/p/471
So, as George Johnson of the NY Times Says, Intelligent Design Is Just "Creationist Superstition," Is It?
Watch this video that's just been released, the latest in a series of conversations with Stephen Meyer about his book. David Klinghoffer http://www.discovery.org/p/209
Mixing metaphors between computers and evolution is bound to produce questionable results. Evolution News & Views
When it comes to ID, science writer George Johnson in the New York Times has generally seemed to subscribe to the Great Equation. David Klinghoffer http://www.discovery.org/p/209
Each Time Genomic "Junk" Turns Out to Be Functional, the Case for Intelligent Design Gets Stronger
William Dembski argued in No Free Lunch that intelligent design theory yields no false positives: the Design Filter he modeled doesn't allow them. Evolution News & Views
The title of Paul's poster was "The Target Problem in Characterizing Early Metazoan Developmental Sequences." Jonathan Wells http://www.discovery.org/p/41
Everyone is looking forward to seeing your calculations. Please keep the rhetoric to a minimum. Michael Behe
Opponents of human exceptionalism never tire of inventing arguments for why human beings are entitled to no special moral standing. Wesley J. Smith http://www.nationalreview.com/human-exceptionalism
When Neanderthal man was first classified, he satisfied a felt need for a separate, intellectually inferior human species. Denyse O'Leary
An Amazon reviewer faults Stephen Meyer's Signature in the Cell for not discussing the question of "junk" DNA. Actually, he does, in multiple places. Here's the lowdown. Andrew McDiarmid http://www.evolutionnews.org
A South African anti-apartheid icon joins the debate on doctor-prescribed death. Et tu, Tutu? Wesley J. Smith http://www.nationalreview.com/human-exceptionalism
As we've discussed extensively here over the past week, a recent paper confirms a key inference I made in 2007 in The Edge of Evolution. Michael Behe
Listen Now. On this episode of ID the Future, Stephen Meyer debates Michael Shermer, founding publisher of Skeptic magazine, on the question: Should scientists be skeptical about Darwinian evolution? The debate extends into the topics of whether we should...
"'Reverse engineering' would seem to imply that there was 'engineering' in the first place." Casey Luskin http://www.discovery.org/p/188
Antievolutionists Say the Darndest Things
Antievolutionists often express outrage over alleged incivility from those who oppose their efforts to evade the establishment clause of the First Amendment. But they have no difficulty in dishing out the abuse themselves. Here is a sample from the Invidious Comparisons thread that documents egregious behavior on the part of the religious antievolution advocates.
One thing that Jack Krebs and I agree with is that Pratt can be likened to an outpost under siege in a cultural war.
My wife and I just returned from a trip to Belgium. We visited Bastogne where a few brave Americans of the 101st Airborne Division were surrounded by the German Army during the battle of the bulge. The German attack was led by a crack SS unit that took no prisoners.
What were we fighting against in Bastogne? We were fighting against a Nazi regime that used the philosophy of Naturalism to justify a eugenics program of terrifying proportions. Naturalism is the belief that all phenomena result only from the laws of chemistry and physics and that teleological or design explanations are not valid. Naturalism is not science. It is a belief system.
In the same manner, the defenders in Pratt are fighting against Naturalism, although they may not realize it. Rather than fighting against science, they are actually fighting for science. They are fighting for science that is driven by logic and critical thinking rather than by a philosophy that teaches to the exclusion of all other teachings that we are the products of only chance and necessity. They are fighting for science that is driven by the scientific method rather than science that is driven by a philosophy of Naturalism.
Rather than using logic and good science to support its assault on the brave contingent in Pratt, the KCFS is using tactics one would expect from those that besieged Bastogne: scare tactics, misinformation and no substantive discussion of the real issues.
So, we are back looking at Pratt as the bombs fall. The question is whether the Board and the Community will be supported by the rest of us as they have had the guts that General McAullife and the other brave Americans had that cold winter day in Bastogne 54 years ago. McAullife's reply was very simple when asked to surrender: "Nuts!" McAullife and the 101st were subsequently relieved by elements of Patton's Third Army. In the same way we all need to rise up and put our hands together for the Pratt Board and Pratt Citizens that have just characterized the outrageous censorship by the science establishment as "Nuts!"