In the News

ARN now has in stock the lastest book just released from Discovery Institute, Darwin's Conservatives: The Misguided Quest by John West.

Should Conservatives embrace Darwin? Conservatives such as George Will, James Q. Wilson, and Larry Arnhart have mounted a vigorous defense of Darwinian biology, even urging other conservatives to draw on Darwin’s theory for support. In this small but incisive book, Dr. John West argues that the quest for “Darwinian conservatism” is misguided and fundamentally flawed. Contrary to claims by Darwin’s conservatives, Darwinian evolution promotes relativism rather than traditional morality. It fosters utopianism rather than limited government. It is corrosive, rather than supportive, of free will and religious belief. Finally, and most importantly, Darwinian evolution is in tension with the scientific evidence.

Click the link above to browse the table of contents, read the endorsements or order your copy today.

Steve Giegerich, of the St. Louis Post-Dispatch, reports that Gov. Matt Blunt pulled his nomination of a former private school administrator to the state Board of Education, hours after state Sen.-elect Jeff Smith objected to the choice.

He said nominee Donayle Whitmore-Smith's support of tax credits, which critics call a school voucher program, was one of several factors in his decision.

Smith also found Whitmore-Smith, an African-American, evasive on the question of whether she supports teaching creationism and intelligent design in public schools.

With the region enticing bio-tech industries to join a research base established by Washington University, the Monsanto Co. and other entities, Smith said a strict separation of faith and state is paramount.

My comment...once again ID is portrayed as a research stopper. How does that follow, except in the minds of careless thinkers?

The staff at Access Research Network has released its 2006 Year-End Report which includes the top Darwin vs. Design news stories for the year. Also available is a 15 minute podcast interview with ARN Executive Director Dennis Wagner and Casey Luskin of Discovery Institute discussing hightlights from the report.

In seperate press releases, ARN also announced today its Top 10 Darwin vs. Design New Stories and Top 10 Darwin vs. Design Resources for 2006.

The MacLaurin MP3 lecture series is an incredible resource.

Denyse O'Leary and Mustafa Akyol are in the series.

Mustafa's talk is of great value to those who want to understand the ramifications of ID in the Muslim world.

O'Leary's talk points out that the media tends to be liberal in large part because traditionalist groups steer young people who are good at communication into the clergy or parachurch ministries. Who is then left to go into media? Non-traditionally minded young people.

Here is the International Journalist's Forum on ID.

And, here is the Q & A session.

And here is the Campus Lectures main page.

Phil Baty, in the Times Higher Education Supplement, reports on The "unrestricted liberty" to be offensive to others without fear of sanction. A radical statement of academic freedom was proposed by an influential group of scholars.

The statement, launched by 64 academics including philosopher A. C. Grayling, would extend the current law that ensures that academics are free to "question and test received wisdom, and to put forward unpopular opinions".

The statement would offer backing to Andrew McIntosh, professor of thermodynamics at Leeds, who has been sharply criticised for claiming that evolutionary theory is wrong.

The 2007 Edition of the ID Calendars are now available from ARN. New this year is the Patterns in Nature calendar featuring 13 spectacular nature photos from around the world by ARN News Editor, Tom Magnuson. You can preview the images and read Tom's comments along with the accompanying calendar quote on the order page.

The 2007 edition of the Mind Preceeded Matter calendar featuring vivid colorful deep-space NASA photos from the Hubble Telescope with 12 fantastic quotes about the origin of the universe has also been updated for 2007.

In addition to these two twelve month calendars, our 2007 11x17 color wall calendars are available with many of our popular T-Shirt images for only $7.99 such as the biological rotary motor or Icons of Darwinism.

Order your calendar today for a great conversation starter in your home or office. Please contact us at info@arn.org for discounts on quantity orders of 15 or more of the same calendar.

Christina Kauffman of the York PA Dispatch reports that a feature film inspired by Dover's intelligent design trial is in the works, but it may be a few years before the movie makes it onto the big screen.

Pennsylvania native Ron Nyswaner, whose writing credits include "Philadelphia," starring Tom Hanks, and "The Prince of Pennsylvania," starring Keanu Reeves, has begun researching and writing the screenplay for Paramount Pictures.

For more, click the link above...

EurekaAlert! reports that Dr. James Windmill from the University of Bristol, UK, has shown how the Yellow Underwing moth changes its sensitivity to a bat's calls when the moth is being chased. And in case there is another attack, the moth's ear remain tuned in for several minutes after the calls stop.

This is remarkable because the moth's ear is very "simple".

Discovery Institute posts on the year since Dover.

John West notes that a year after Dover, Darwinists seem increasingly disillusioned as well as shrill, the central part of Judge Jones' "brilliant" decision has been found to be riddled with errors and copied nearly verbatim from the ACLU, a research lab has been launched for scientists to pursue intelligent design-inspired scientific research, and states and localities are continuing to adopt public policies to encourage students to study the scientific evidence for and against Darwin's theory.

John Timmer, on the Ars technica Web site, posts on the Cobb County GA textbook sticker case.

Not in the post, but the school board has agreed to never re-apply the sticker in question. The school board is also paying the plaintiffs about $160,000, which is reported to be about 1/3 of the legal costs of plaintiffs. The school did not admit that the sticker was unconstitutional.

Tim Radford comments in Education Guardian (UK) on ID. He claims it isn't science, and it may not even be "Christian".

This comment is an excellent example of obfuscation. He compares the irreducible complexity of the eye (he could have used DNA, or flagellum) to the motion of the planets around the sun. The solar system was once "IC", he claims, and we figured that out, so the implication is that we will eventually figure out all the IC in biology.

The sad thing is...multitudes fall for this line of "thought".

Read more...

This post is a follow-up on the ID research labs in the Northwest.

John West's post is on Evolution News & Views...

The UK has its version of the American NCSE.

Here the blog link...

Bo Alawine works for a defense contractor on the Gulf Coast. His essay in the Hattiesburg American has all the slogans, one-liners, straw men, religious bigotry, and talking points of the materialists in a readable form.

Here is the essay...

Mark Vernon, of Spiked online, reports that Richard Dawkins has published a rant against religion. Vernon comments that Dawkins could learn much from an earlier Darwinian bulldog, Thomas Henry Huxley.

Dawkins accuses believers of having minds 'hijacked by religion'. Replace the word religion with science, and he could be expounding on himself. Intolerance leads him to fundamentalist rhetoric. What would be more helpful would be a revival of the richer, intellectually humbler and socially tolerant stanch of the committed agnostic.

More...

In the Guardian, Richard Dawkins writes a note on "Truth in Science" and Andrew MacIntosh.

Here's the letter...

There is a new pro-darwinism book where the authors, Cameron Smith and Charles Sullivan, have supposedly identified the 10 most common misconceptions about evolution.

Among the many topics that have galvanized the public in recent years, the debate over evolution versus intelligent design has generated an outpouring of heated rhetoric from both sides. The book is an effort to clarify prevailing misinterpretations and counteract misinformation relayed through the media, from the pulpit, or in the classroom.

More from Amazon book list...

William Dembski has had private internet chats with Richard Dawkins over the past several years. Richard Dawkins reprinted some of William Dembski's letters, so Dembski assumes the same privilege.

Read the first installment, from the uncommondescent Web site, with comments, by clicking HERE.

Gregory M. Lamb, of the Christian Science Monitor, interviewed world renown scientist Freeman Dyson.

Dyson's new compilation, The Scientist as Rebel, previously published essays and book reviews written over nearly four decades are included.

Dyson rebels against the idea that scientists should only concern themselves with the problems of the laboratory.

"Science is a particular bunch of tools that have been conspicuously successful for understanding and manipulating the material universe," Dyson concludes. "Religion is another bunch of tools, giving us hints of a mental or spiritual universe that transcends the material universe."

For the full article click HERE.

Apparently, Judge Jones has been reading the papers and surfing the Web. In his commencement address delivered at Dickinson College, citations have been added in the past week...as reported by the Discovery Institute.

La Jolla, CA -- leading scientists from around the world gathered November 5-7, 2006 at one of the world’s largest biotech center’s, the Salk Institute, to strategize how they could defeat both religion and intelligent design at the Beyond Belief Conference. The atheistic agenda of leading scientists, many whom are funded by government institutions, is now out on the table and available for the world to see in the video recordings of the ten sessions available on the Internet.

The three stated goals of the conference were 1) to examine the clash of cultures between science and religion; 2) to explore how we can do good without God. What is our source of morality? and 3) If not God, then what? Can science help us create a new rational narrative as poetic and powerful as those that have traditionally sustained societies?

Nobel prize winning physicist, Steven Weinberg, closed his opening talk with the following statement: "The world needs to wake up from its long nightmare of religious belief and anything we scientists can do to weaken the hold of religion should be done, and may in fact be our greatest contribution to civilization."

In addition to the opening session with Weinberg, Krauss, Harris and Shermer, you won't want to miss the slugfest between the irrational Richard Dawkins and the gracious Joan Roughgarden in session three, or the tongue lashing that is given by the rational atheists Jim Woodward and Melvin Konner to their irrational counterparts in session 9.

The conference was sponsored by The Science Network, The Crick-Jacobs Center and the Salk Institute for Biological Studies. The Beyond Belief II Conference is scheduled for November 1-3, 2007.

Terry Eagleton, John Edward Taylor, a Professor of English Literature at Manchester University, has published a review of Richard Dawkin's latest book, The God Delusion, and concludes that Dawkins is the one that appears to be deluded about theology and his own importance:

"Nearly 50 per cent of Americans believe that a glorious Second Coming is imminent, and some of them are doing their damnedest to bring it about. But Dawkins could have told us all this without being so appallingly bitchy about those of his scientific colleagues who disagree with him, and without being so theologically illiterate. He might also have avoided being the second most frequently mentioned individual in his book – if you count God as an individual."

On December 12, 2006, Discovery Institute released a report which found that "90.9% (or 5,458 words) of Judge Jones' 6,004-word section on intelligent design as science was taken virtually verbatim from the ACLU's proposed 'Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law'." Since that time, Discovery Institute has received questions from various media sources and the public. The backgrounder on the report will help answer some common questions, and is avaialble by clicking the link above...

The House Government Reform Subcommittee on Criminal Justice, Drug Policy, and Human Resources has issued its official report on the investigation into the harassment and discrimination against biologist Dr. Richard Sternberg. The congressional report bluntly states: The staff investigation has uncovered compelling evidence that Dr. Sternberg’s civil and constitutional rights were violated by Smithsonian officials.

One Smithsonian scientist said that having Sternberg working in the same room with other researchers would create an impossible work environment for the other researchers. Where was the moral outrage from the Progressives at this blatant bigotry?

For the full story, click the link above...

Vasantha Raja, in the Asian Tribune, reports that Dawkins' anti-God offensive seems to include at least two mutually exclusive targets: One - to ridicule the biblical interpretation of God and Creation; two – to undermine the Intelligent Design hypothesis, whose appeal is gathering momentum among scientific/philosophical circles at present.

Raja is unconvinced by Dawkins' arguments, claiming they fail to refute the powerful insights ID theorists continue to develop, and ID theories will eventually prove to be positively fruitful for the scientific method itself.

Read the rest of this lucid article by clicking the link above...

Judge Jones will be the plenary speaker at the 2007 Botany & Plant Biology Joint Congress in Chicago in July.

He certainly is getting the mileage out of his decision...

Did Judge Jones Plagiarize Scholar's Book in Dickinson College Commencement Speech?

Today from a Discovery Institute Press Release:

"We have made clear that Judge Jones' wholesale and uncritical copying from ACLU attorneys in the Kitzmiller v. Dover decision is not considered "plagiarism" in legal circles--even though such verbatim copying has been frowned upon by appellate courts. But what about the unattributed use of language from someone else's book in a public speech? According to the posted text of his Commencement Address at Dickinson College, Judge Jones appears to have engaged in unattributed copying outside the courtroom as well. Compare the following passages and decide for yourself whether this new finding constitutes plagiarism."

Judge Jones' Commencement Address at Dickinson College (2006):

"...our Founding Fathers... possessed a great confidence in an individual's ability to understand the world and its most fundamental laws through the exercise of his or her reason... The Founders believed that true religion was not something handed down by a church or contained in a Bible, but was to be found through free, rational inquiry... this core set of beliefs led the Founders... to secure their idea of religious freedom by barring any alliance between church and state."
http://www.dickinson.edu/commencement/2006/address.html

Compare that to Frank Lambert's, The Founding Fathers and the Place of Religion in America (Princeton University Press, 2003):

"The Founding Fathers... had great confidence in the individual's ability to understand the world and its most fundamental laws through the exercise of his or her reason. To them, true religion was not something handed down by a church or contained in the Bible but rather was to be found through free rational inquiry...the framers sought to secure their idea of religious freedom by barring any alliance between church and state."

(Frank Lambert, The Founding Fathers and the Place of Religion in
America, pg. 3 (2003). You can also find this material online at http://press.princeton.edu/chapters/i7500.html)

FoxNews reports that a Russian court held hearings in an unprecedented lawsuit brought by a 15-year-old student, who says being taught the theory of evolution in school violates her rights and insults her religious beliefs.

Maria Shreiber sued the St. Petersburg city education committee, claiming the 10th-grade biology textbook used at the Cervantes Gymnasium was offensive to believers and that teachers should offer an alternative to Darwin's famous theory.

Read more by clicking the link above...

Celeste Biever Redmond reports in NewScientist about a one-year-old institute which is the new face of another industry that has sprung up in the Seattle area - the one that has set out to try to prove Darwinism is wrong. It has been funded by the Discovery Institute.

"We are the first ones doing what we might call lab science in intelligent design," says George Weber, one of four Biologic's directors. "The objective is to challenge the scientific community on naturalism."

The claim is that if ID supporters can bolster their case by citing more experimental research, then ID does qualify as science, and is therefore a legitimate topic for discussion in American science classrooms. This is precisely the kind of scientific respectability that research at the Biologic Institute is attempting to provide. "We need all the input we can get in the sciences," Weber told me. "What we are doing is necessary to move ID along."

In addition, two articles referenced in this article in the Journal of Molecular Biology were the direct result of support provided by Discovery Institute's research fellowship program.

Judge Jones refused to comment today to reporters from Associated Press and WorldNetDaily when asked about the recent study revealing that 90% of the key section of his Dover v. Kitzmiller decision on Intelligent Design was copied from an ACLU brief.

The Discovery Institute released a study today revealing that the key section of the widely noted Kitzmiller v. Dover court decision on intelligent design issued a year ago on December 20 was copied nearly verbatim from a document written by ACLU lawyers.

From the Discovery Institute Press Release:

"Judge John Jones copied verbatim or virtually verbatim 90.9% of his 6,004-word section on whether intelligent design is science from the ACLU's proposed 'Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law' submitted to him nearly a month before his ruling," said Dr. John West, Vice President for Public Policy and Legal Affairs at Discovery Institute's Center for Science and Culture.

"Ironically, Judge Jones has been hailed as 'an outstanding thinker' for his 'masterful' ruling, and even honored by Time magazine as one of the world's 'most influential people' in the category of 'scientists and thinkers,'" said West. "But Jones' analysis of the scientific status of intelligent design contains virtually nothing written by Jones himself. This finding seriously undercuts the credibility of a central part of the ruling."

The study notes that, while judges routinely make use of proposed findings of fact, "the extent to which Judge Jones simply copied the language submitted to him by the ACLU is stunning. For all practical purposes, Jones allowed ACLU attorneys to write nearly the entire section of his opinion analyzing whether intelligent design is science. As a result, this central part of Judge Jones' ruling reflected essentially no original deliberative activity or independent examination of the record on Jones' part."

Jones' copying was so uncritical that he even reprinted a number of factual errors originally made by ACLU attorneys.

For example, Jones claimed that biochemist Michael Behe, when asked about articles purporting to explain the evolution of the immune system, responded that the articles were "not 'good enough.'" Behe actually said the exact opposite: "it's not that they aren't good enough. It's simply that they are addressed to a different subject." Jones' misrepresentation of Behe came directly from the ACLU's "Findings of Fact."

***

What is even more amazing is that Judge Jones has been stumping around the country elaborating on the importance and brilliance of “his” decision as evidenced by his recent speaking schedule to college students and professional societies detailed below. Here is just one quote from his commencement speech at his alma mater, Dickerson College (link to full text of his speech is below):

“Not long ago, I decided a case that caused me to become, at least temporarily, somewhat famous in the world at large. And while I have accomplished some interesting things in my life, I know that my invitation to speak to you today is largely the result of my work in that trial involving the concept of intelligent design. In the course of the Kitzmiller v. Dover case I heard from experts in among other fields those of biology, philosophy, theology, paleontology, and science education. And, I had to use my common sense and hopefully good judgment to weigh the credibility of many lay witnesses as well.”

“One might be tempted to assume that I received all of the tools necessary to understand the complex expert testimony and determine the facts solely through my law school education. If so, they would be incorrect. In fact, it was my liberal arts education, achieved right here at Dickinson College that provided me with the best ability to handle the rather monumental task of deciding the Dover case.”

***

The only tools Judge Jones apparently used in the Dover case were the “Cut & Paste” features of Microsoft Word. And yet for this he was introduced by the President of Bennington College at his most recent lecture with the following accolades:

"Judge Jones is that increasingly rare phenomenon--a genuine hero of our time—principled, enlightened, and profoundly courageous—reminding us all of the individual acts of leadership that have made this nation soar. It is a great pleasure and honor for this College to have him as our guest," remarked Elizabeth Coleman, president of Bennington College.

Recent Speeches by Judge John Jones:

February 10, 2006:
No Title)
Anti-Defamation League
National Executive Committee Meeting
Palm Beach, Florida
Full speech: http://www.adl.org/Civil_Rights/speech_judge_jones.asp

March 9, 2006:
(No Title)
Lycoming College
Astronomy/Physics Colloquium
Williamsport, Pennsylvania
More info: http://www.lycoming.edu/whatsnew/releases/2006/JudgeJones.htm

April 25, 2006:
"On the Constitution's Establishment Clause"
Lutheran Theological Seminary
Spring Convocation
Gettysburg, Pennsylvania
More info: http://www.ltsg.edu/events/springconvo.htm

May 19-21, 2006:
(No Title)
Dickinson College
2006 Commencement Lecture
Carlisle, Pennsylvania
Full text: http://www.dickinson.edu/commencement/2006/address.html

October 23, 2006:
"Judicial Independence- A Trial Judge's Reflections After Kitzmiller v.
Dover."
Geological Society of America (GSA)
Annual Meeting
Philadephia, Pennsylvania
More info: http://www.geosociety.org/GSA_Connection/archive/0610.htm

October 25, 2006:
(No Title)
Widener University School of Law
Regular Lecture
Harrisburg, Pennsylvania
*This lecture was broadcast on 10/28 on C-SPAN's "America & the Courts"
More info: http://www.law.widener.edu/news/articles/2006/hb_100306.shtml

November 27, 2006:
(No Title)
Bennington College
Ruth D. Ewing '37 Lecture in Social Activism More info: http://www.bennington.edu/news_pr_061017jones.asp

In the American Spectator, Richard Kirk reviews The God Delusion. According to Kirk, the book features page after sarcastic page of attacks against any foe Dawkins considers an easy target: Pat Robertson, Pastor Ted Haggard, Ann Coulter, a small fundamentalist school in Northeast England (to which 7 of Dawkins' 374 pages are devoted), Pastor Fred "God Hates Fags" Phelps, Dr. James Dobson, and, of course, G. W. Bush - who supposedly invaded Iraq because he was told to do so by God. Even poor Carl Jung is made into a kook by Dawkins for believing "that particular books on his shelf spontaneously exploded."

More by clicking the link above...

Truth in Science is faced by growing political opposition as Members of Parliament and Government ministers seek to discourage science teachers from using their resource packs. Forty MPs are calling for a "restriction" on its use and one has suggested a "directive" against it.

Click the link above for more...

Jennifer Toomer-Cook of the Deseret News reports on the meeting of Darwinism and ID in Utah.

Intelligent Design was debated on two Utah college campuses last week. And a Utah senator says while he won't carry another origins of life bill, something else could be in the works.

Biological philosopher Paul Nelson of the Discovery Institute, in a Utah Valley State College panel discussion last week, said that while not yet a scientific theory, Intelligent Design may gain legitimacy in the scientific community to explain origins of Earth and its inhabitants.

David Toplikar, of the Lawrence Journal-World reports on the lecture by Michael Behe, titled "The Argument for Intelligent Design in Biology". It was part of the "Difficult Dialogues" lecture series sponsored by KU's Hall Center for the Humanities and KU's Biodiversity Institute.

He said intelligent design was not a philosophy, but a scientific conclusion that uses inductive reasoning.

"An inductive conclusion is a scientific conclusion," he said.

On the Web site Ignatius.com Benjamin Wiker (Ph.D., Vanderbilt), lecturer in theology and science at the Franciscan University of Steubenville in Ohio is interviewed. He is also a senior fellow of Discovery Institute in Seattle, Washington. His work has been published in First Things, National Catholic Register, Crisis, Catholic World Report and the New Oxford Review. He is the author of Moral Darwinism, Architects of the Culture of Death, and the recently published A Meaningful World: How the Arts and Sciences Reveal the Genius of Nature, published by InterVarsity Press and co-authored with Jonathan Witt.

Carl E. Olson, editor of IgnatiusInsight.com, spoke with Dr. Wiker about his new book, science, religion, evolution, intelligent design, and the meaning of meaning.

James Randerson of the Guardian reports that the government will write to schools telling them that controversial packs, including DVDs and written materials promoting intelligent design, should not be used in lessons. The packets were sent to every school in the country by the privately-funded group Truth in Science. The Guardian revealed that 59 schools had told Truth in Science the materials were a "useful classroom resource".

Evan Harris, the Liberal Democrats' science spokesman, said that he feared that some teachers would use the packs to promote intelligent design as a belief or that it would be presented as a valid scientific theory.

Darwin Strikes Back by Thomas Woodward

What started as a debate among scientists has become a full-scale public battle. In this sequel to his award-winning Doubts about Darwin, Thomas Woodward traces the struggle that has emerged as the two sides wrestle with questions of the origin of life. Woodward answers these questions and more:

* Who are the key players on each side, and what contributions have they made?
* How has the debate developed, and where is it headed in the future?
* What conclusions can we draw about our origins based on the scientific evidence?

Woodward examines three major design theorists: Michael Behe, Jonathan Wells, and William Dembski, as well as their most notable critics including biologist Kenneth Miller, philosopher Niall Shanks, educator Eugenie Scott, and Richard Dawkins. Woodward, once a staunch supporter of Darwinian evolution himself, finds that critics of intelligent design often offer flawed arguments.

For a longer review on the book check out Don Cicchetti's blog.

Endorsements:

"Lucid, thorough, and brisk as the morning news, Darwin Strikes Back traces the launch of the Intelligent Design Movement and the response it has elicited. Woodward shows how ID challenges the interpretation of intelligent display without intelligent agency and calls for an alternative assessment of scientific data. While providing a valuable resource for the seasoned observer, this book should be especially appealing to students and newcomers to the debate wishing to be rapidly brought up to speed."
--Leo R. Zacharski, professor of medicine, Dartmouth Medical School

"In their attempt to return fire in the debate against Intelligent Design, the Darwinists are mostly shooting blanks. Tom Woodward does a masterful job of dissecting weak polemic and showing how the Darwinian establishment has resorted to proof by confident assertion, genetic fallacies, and ad homonym tactics rather than genuinely engaging the arguments and evidence that ID theorists have mustered. Woodward predicts correctly that such tactics will not ultimately prevail."
--Stephen C. Meyer, director, Center for Science and Culture Discovery Institute

"In Darwin Strikes Back Tom Woodward chronicles the recent acrimonious history of ID and its antagonists. Woodward is an insider who tells an engaging story that will clarify both the nature and the source of current sharp debate surrounding this issue."
--Kenneth Petzinger, professor of physics, College of William and Mary

"In Darwin Strikes Back, Woodward presents a clear, accurate, and intriguing account of Intelligent Design, its history, the arguments in its favor, the counterarguments by the Darwinists, and the responses by the ID theorists. This is an important book for anyone who wants a clear picture of the ID/evolution debate."
--Russell W. Carlson, professor of biochemistry and molecular biology; executive technical director of the complex carbohydrate research center, University of Georgia

"Darwin Strikes Back tells the thrilling story of how the Darwinian establishment has summoned all its power to crush the frightening challenge of the Intelligent Design Movement, and how the rebels are not only surviving but gaining new strength as we respond to the onslaught. Highly recommended."
--Phillip E. Johnson, emeritus professor of law, University of California, Berkeley; author, Darwin on Trial

"Taking the reader behind the headlines, Thomas Woodward--the premier historian of the Intelligent Design Movement--analyzes crucial developments of the past decade."
--Michael J. Behe, department of biology, Lehigh University

"The controversy over Darwinism and Intelligent Design signals a major scientific and social revolution. Everyone who wants to understand it should read this timely and well-written book."
--Jonathan Wells, author, The Politically Incorrect Guide to Darwinism and Intelligent Design

The Ouachita Parish School Board unanimously approved a resolution to allow its teachers “academic freedom” in teaching all sides of controversial issues such as Darwin’s Theory of Evolution.

Following the vote Wednesday at the school board meeting, several audience members of the packed board room applauded.

Retired Judge Darrell White of Baton Rouge, consultant with Louisiana Family Forum’s Education Resource Council, commended the school board for setting a precedent he hopes other school systems will follow.

Ouachita Parish is the first school system in the state to adopt such a measure that will give its teachers academic freedom.

More...

The Reading (PA) Eagle reports that a debate on evolution vs. intelligent design will be held Wednesday at 7:30 p.m. in the Perkins Student Center Auditorium at Penn State Berks.

The speakers will be Dr. Michael Shermer, a leading proponent of evolutionary theory, and Paul A. Nelson, a philosopher of biology who has critically evaluated the theory of common descent in various articles.

December 7, 2006, 7:30-9:30 p.m., “The Case for a Creator” at Biola University with Lee Strobel, Steve Meyer, Jay Richards, JP Moreland, Jonathan Wells, Mike Behe, and others. Witness the launch of a much-anticipated DVD product based on Lee Strobel’s best selling book. Hear from scholars who are helping to win the debate over Darwinism in our time. Join us at this exclusive free event and receive a free copy of the DVD "The Case for a Creator." Call 888 332-4652 or click the link above and click special events to register.

If the cell was not made out of bio-stuff, would the Darwinists think it was the product of intellect? Read the article above.

The Daily Democrat reports that Phillip E. Johnson, "the father of the intelligent design movement," will be speaking on the UC Davis campus on Friday at 7 p.m. in 123 Sciences Lecture Hall. The event is free and open to the public.

"An Evening with Phillip Johnson" is hosted by Grace Alive, a ministry of Grace Valley Christian Center, as part of the Faith and Reason lecture series.

A live exchange between Professor Lewis Wolpert and Professor Andy McIntosh on BBC Newsnight on Monday mentions the Truth in Science
initiative, which uses ID materials. Truth in Science claims that dozens of British schools are using its instruction packs to teach intelligent design in science classes. The packs, which includes two DVDs and a manual, were sent to every secondary school in Britain by the organisation on 18 September."

When you access the Web site, click on the down arrow next to the box with "Past programmes" in it, and choose Monday 27th.

The relevant parts are from 18:48 to 27:00.

Here are many of the articles that have been written on the challenge to Darwinian orthodoxy in the UK. It looks like Truth in Science is causing a media storm.

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

Evolution News & Views shows a great example of media distortion and bias in a story about Kansas Science Standards.

Cal Tech Physicist, Kenneth G. Libbrecht, maintains a very interesting website summarizing his research on snowflakes and has coauthored a book on the topic (The Snowflake: Winter’s Secret Beauty).

Snowflakes are often cited as evidence against intelligent design as examples of highly ordered structures that form naturally. Snowflakes are highly ordered and possess a somewhat complex, specified structure. While the probability of the exact conformation of each individual flake is quite low, the structure of snowflakes is the predictable result of matter obeying the laws of chemistry and physics under certain conditions. Snowflakes, then, although low-probability and specified, are also low in information, because their specification is in the laws, which are always and everywhere the same. So the formation of a snowflake is quite different from the natural formation of DNA which is highly ordered, complex, and high in information content.

Whether you think snowflakes are evidence for or against ID (where did those laws of physics and chemistry come from that cause snowflakes to form?), you will enjoy Dr. Libbrecht catalog of snowflakes and explanation of how they form, and marvel how much we still don't understand about these beautiful crystals that fall from the sky. You might also cheer that Dr. Libbrecht spends his time studying snowflakes for the pure curiosity of understanding the world around us (and not because some corporate ski resort is paying him to make more snow).

Nicole Striker, of the Salt Lake City Tribune, reports that the intelligent design debate is returning to Utah in the form of the 11th annual Religion and the Humanities Conference on Friday, Dec. 1st at Utah Valley State College and Westminster College.
The four invited speakers include two fellows from the pro-intelligent design Discovery Institute, Paul Nelson, who focuses on developmental and evolutionary biology, and Robin Collins, a philosophy professor at Messiah College, a private Christian college in Pennsylvania. One the other side of the debate will be John Haught, former theology chairman at Georgetown University, and Michael Ruse, philosophy professor at Florida State University.

Hilary White writes for LifeSite.net on some Richard Dawkins statements.

In a letter to the editor of Scotland’s Sunday Herald, Dawkins argues that though no one wants to be seen to be in agreement with Hitler on any particular, "if you can breed dogs for herding skill, why on Earth should it be impossible to breed humans for mathematical, musical or athletic ability?"

He is also a leader of the movement to gain legal "human" rights for great apes, arguing that since there is no such thing as a soul, there is no moral difference between apes and humans.

To paraphrase Dostoyevsky...if there is no higher power, then all things are permitted.

This paper by Michael W. Tkacz, Associate Professor of Philosophy, was prepared for the Gonzaga University Socratic Club.

It explains why the Thomists have so much trouble with IDT.

George Johnson writes in the NY Times about a forum this month at the Salk Institute for Biological Studies in La Jolla, Calif. It might have been one more polite dialogue between science and religion, but began to resemble the founding convention for a political party built on a single plank: in a world dangerously charged with ideology, science needs to take on an evangelical role, vying with religion as teller of the greatest story ever told.

Look out, evangelical materialism is charging up, but there are rumblings from opponents, and Darwinists.

Read this amazing article...

John Hanna of AP writes on KS science standards and the Wichita Eagle picked up the story.

Kansas public schools are likely to get their fifth set of science standards in eight years, and officials who want to ditch the anti-evolution ones now in place aren't planning to act immediately.

Two new State Board of Education members take office Jan. 8, ending a conservative GOP majority and giving control to a coalition of Democrats and moderate Republicans. That makes a return to standards treating evolution as well-grounded science - not a flawed theory - seem inevitable.

Back to the 19th century...

ScienceDaily reports that University of Iowa scientists have made a discovery that broadens understanding of a rapidly developing area of biology known as functional genomics and sheds more light on the mysterious, so-called "junk DNA" that makes up the majority of the human genome.

Some of the junk DNA is not junk at all, but instead consists of sequences that can generate microRNAs.

This shows that the so-called "junk DNA" trumpeted by Darwinists as leftovers from random mutation, should have never been called junk. While there is more "junk DNA" that still looks like "junk", maybe it isn't. And, if scientists hadn't assumed the Darwinian paradigm, maybe the function of the DNA would have been discovered sooner. Darwinism could have been a "science slower".

The Center for Inquiry is a global federation committed to science, reason, free inquiry, secularism, and planetary ethics.

The purpose of the Center for Inquiry is to promote and defend reason, science, and freedom of inquiry in all areas of human endeavor.

With the mission and purpose stated, regarding freedom of inquiry, would ID have a place at the table. No wait, that darn materialistic worldview is there; committed to secularism. Even though some IDers allow for non-supernatural ID, they probably wouldn't be welcomed either.

CFI doesn't realize evolution is neutral on religion, according to NCSE.

Steven Swinford, writing in the London Sunday Times, reports that Richard Dawkins, the Oxford University professor and campaigning atheist, is planning to take his fight against God into the classroom by flooding schools with anti-religious literature.

He is setting up a charity that will subsidise books, pamphlets and DVDs attacking the "educational scandal" of theories such as creationism while promoting rational and scientific thought. The foundation will also attempt to divert donations from the hands of "missionaries" and church-based charities.

Truth in Science has sent DVDs and educational materials to thousands of secondary schools to encourage them to debate intelligent design. Andy McIntosh, director at the organisation and professor of thermodynamics at Leeds University, said: "We are not flat-earthers. We’re just trying to encourage good scientific discussion."

Dawkins, however, describes the theory as a "bronze-age myth".

Dawkins seems to be a master at ad hominem attacks and name-calling, which is the tactic of choice when you cannot put forth a good argument.

This just in from thte BBC.

In July 2001, a mysterious red rain started falling over a large area of southern India. Locals believed that it foretold the end of the world, though the official explanation was that it was desert dust that had blown over from Arabia. But one scientist in the area, Dr Godfrey Louis, was convinced there was something much more unusual going on. Not only did Dr Louis discover that there were tiny biological cells present, but because they did not appear to contain DNA, the essential component of all life on Earth, he reasoned they must be alien lifeforms...

However, a little known fact is that mammalian red blood cells have no DNA. They shed their nucleus and all organelles upon reaching maturity.

And, anyway, if life on Earth came from “another planet,” how did it begin there? Oh, that's right, conditions were "different" there, so it was inevitable that life would spring forth in the cosmos by natural processes.

Evolution News & Views response to National Geographic's recent evolution article will discuss both Carl Zimmer's scientific arguments regarding the evolution of the eye, and his theological arguments which he uses to claim the eye was not designed.

Michelle Vu, of the Christian Post, reports on Dr. Paul Nelson's defense of Intelligent Design by presenting an unsolved genetic puzzle on Thursday during a three-day apologetics conference at McLean Bible Church.

Evolution News & Views reports on a UCSD event.

Forcing people to go to an event, given by a speaker who is paid with tax monies...what if students were forced to go to a pro-ID talk? The double standard is evident.

The column in townhall.com, by Michael Medved, describes the inconsistencies in thinking by people like Elton John, who plead for tolerance about their ideas, and are wholly intolerant of ideas they don't like, such as religion and ID.

These inconsistencies should always be challenged when met.

Yudhijit Bhattacharjee, of ScienceNow, reports that Intelligent design (ID) received a drubbing this election cycle.

David Van Biema, of Time Magazine, asks if Darwinian evolution can withstand the criticisms of Christians who believe that it contradicts the creation account in the Book of Genesis? Van Biema comments, "In recent years, creationism took on new currency as the spiritual progenitor of 'intelligent design' (I.D.), a scientifically worded attempt to show that blanks in the evolutionary narrative are more meaningful than its very convincing totality."

You can see the materialist philosophy in the last three words in the last sentence.

Read on by clicking the link above.

Christine Adrian, of the Daily O'Collegian, reports on the race for state superintendent of public instruction. The republican challenger wants the concept of intelligent design taught in Oklahoma classrooms.

Read excerpts and watch clips of Lee Strobel's interview with former atheist Antony Flew, who now believes in an intelligent designer.

Jonathan Wells reviews the book The Plausibility of Life, by Marc W. Kirschner and John C. Gerhart in Christianity Today.

Wells writes that the book claims to remedy some major flaw in evolutionary theory. But, not so fast...read the rest...

Adam Parker, of the Charleston Post and Courier, reports that six candidates for state superintendent of education have found much to disagree about, but when it comes to whether intelligent design should be taught in schools, all but one see eye to eye.

While Republican Karen Floyd is not the only candidate who thinks teaching alternatives to Darwin's theories would benefit students, she is the one who says it's appropriate to discuss intelligent design in public school science classes.

Click the link above for the rest of the story.

In the Denver Post, Dr. Doug Groothuis, professor of philosophy at Denver Seminary, reviewed two books released within a few weeks of each other. They address Darwinism and its critics, but in radically different ways. Not only do the authors hold entirely different positions on Darwinism and the alternative theory of intelligent design, but there also is a vast chasm between the tone and approach of these books.

Jonathan Wells, who holds doctorates in both religion and embryology, is a leading advocate of intelligent design. You can purchase his new book, "The Politically Incorrect Guide to Darwinism and Intelligent Design" by clicking HERE.

On the other hand, editor and author Michael Shermer, formerly a professor of psychology, is generally condescending toward intelligent design. His book is also available now by clicking the title Why Darwin Matters: The Case Against Intelligent Design

Mustafa Akyol, on Whitepath.com, reports on a recent TV debate on the Turkish educational system, where the country's Minister of Education, Mr. Huseyin Celik, argued in favor of intelligent design and for incorporating the theory into Turkish high school biology textbooks. The debate was aired on CNNTurk* on 17 October 2006.

The Nashua Telegraph reports that a physicist and former college physics professor, David Heddle, will give a presentation on intelligent design in Nashua on Thursday, November 2nd.

The talk is praised by reviewers for its ability to place religious faith and modern physics peacefully in the same room, and will take place from 7-8:30 p.m. in the Nashua High School South lecture hall.

Scott Stephens, of the Newhouse News Service, reports on the importance of this fall's race between State Board of Education member Deborah Owens Fink and her challenger, Tom Sawyer.

The Indiana College Biology Teachers Association is having a meeting about evolution / ID issues at IU Kokomo.

For details...click the link above.

A quite funny encounter with Richard Dawkins...click the link above.

This is the sixth article in a series on ID by Sekai Nippo in World Peace Herald.

Evolution News & Views reports on the misinformation "campaign" in the UK against anything that questions Darwinism.

Richard Dawkins, one of most well known antagonists of ID and religion, did a reading from his new book, The God Delusion, at a local bookstore in Washington, DC. After the reading he fielded questions. A person sympathetic to ID asked Dawkins if he thought he was being inconsistent by being a determinist while taking credit for writing his book. His answer was surprising. Here is the transcript:

Questioner: Dr. Dawkins thank you for your comments. The thing I have appreciated most about your comments is your consistency in the things I've seen you written. One of the areas that I wanted to ask you about and the places where I think there is an inconsistency and I hoped you would clarify it is that in what I've read you seem to take a position of a strong determinist who says that what we see around us is the product of physical laws playing themselves out but on the other hand it would seem that you would do things like taking credit for writing this book and things like that. But it would seem, and this isn't to be funny, that the consistent position would be that necessarily the authoring of this book from the initial condition of the big bang it was set that this would be the product of what we see today. I would take it that that would be the consistent position but I wanted to know what you thought about that.

Dawkins: The philosophical question of determinism is a very difficult question. It's not one I discuss in this book, indeed in any other book that I've ever talked about. Now an extreme determinist, as the questioner says, might say that everything we do, everything we think, everything that we write, has been determined from the beginning of time in which case the very idea of taking credit for anything doesn't seem to make any sense. Now I don't actually know what I actually think about that, I haven't taken up a position about that, it's not part of my remit to talk about the philosophical issue of determinism. What I do know is that what it feels like to me, and I think to all of us, we don't feel determined. We feel like blaming people for what they do or giving people the credit for what they do. We feel like admiring people for what they do. None of us ever actually as a matter of fact says, "Oh well he couldn't help doing it, he was determined by his molecules." Maybe we should… I sometimes… Um… You probably remember many of you would have seen Fawlty Towers. The episode where Basil where his car won't start and he gives it fair warning, counts up to three, and then gets out of the car and picks up a tree branch and thrashes it within an edge of his life. Maybe that's what we all ought to... Maybe the way we laugh at Basil Fawlty, we ought to laugh in the same way at people who blame humans. I mean when we punish people for doing the most horrible murders, maybe the attitude we should take is "Oh they were just determined by their molecules." It's stupid to punish them. What we should do is say "This unit has a faulty motherboard which needs to be replaced." I can't bring myself to do that. I actually do respond in an emotional way and I blame people, I give people credit, or I might be more charitable and say this individual who has committed murders or child abuse of whatever it is was really abused in his own childhood. And so again I might take a …

Questioner: But do you personally see that as an inconsistency in your views?

Dawkins: I sort of do. Yes. But it is an inconsistency that we sort of have to live with otherwise life would be intolerable. But it has nothing to do with my views on religion it is an entirely separate issue.

Questioner: Thank you.
_____________

Richard Dawkins is a staunch materialist who simply cannot follow his worldview to its logical conclusions. He follows his innate moral intuition, which cannot be explained by material processes, and concedes that he cannot truly live out his worldview.

Dawkins' naturalistic determinism requires that anything like consciousness, self-awareness, and freedom must be emergent properties of matter. Humans must deal with this "reality" as best they can. The concession is huge because it means Dawkins' scientism has no place for "humanness'.

Logan Paul Gage is a policy analyst at the Discovery Institute, and writes that astrphysicist George Coyne lectured before the largest scientific organization in the world, the American Association for the Advancement of Science. As he railed against biological arguments for intelligent design (ID), Gage wondered what Coyne thought of the now-mainstream design arguments in his own field. Click the link above for more.

ScienceDaily reports that a report published Oct. 19 in the journal Nature, suggests evidence that the ancestors of mushrooms, lichens and various other fungi may have lost their original wiggling taillike "flagellae" on several different occasions as they evolved from water to land environments while branching off from animals in the process.

Their losses of flagellae "coincided with the evolution of new mechanisms of spore dispersal, such as aerial dispersal," said the report.

More lucky coincidences as the creatures "found" ways of adapting. The words suggest intent and purpose in the process, which the Darwinists vehemently deny. This smuggling in of "design language" occurs all the time.

Once upon a time some social progressives took upon themselves the task of reclassifying a book just because they could. Read the "story" about how "Darwin's Nemesis" became a work of religion instead of science in a California library.

This is troubling, because our opponents actually believe that by attaching a different label to something, it magically becomes so. Put an orangutan in a tux, and call it Pierce Brosnan. Yeah...that's it.

ScienceDaily reports on the amazing complexity of intra-cellular movement and regulating of materials. I don't have enough faith to believe this small thing is a happy accident of natural selection. That it occurred in tiny steps over vast amounts of time is a just-so story.

David Quinn, a well known Catholic commentator and journalist in Ireland, debated Richard Dawkins on Irish radio on the reasonableness of religious belief. Dawkins is a formidable debater, but David Quinn embarrassed him. To hear the 18 minute audio, clear the link above. We could learn much from David Quinn.

Del Ratzsch, a clear-thinking scientist who is sympathetic to ID concepts is interviewed.

Leonard Susskind, the "Father" of String Theory, apparently debated himself at UC-Davis, attended by around 250 interested listeners.

Michael Miller, of the California Aggie, reported that Susskind said, "that with billions of galaxies and planets within our infinite universe, statistically speaking, there must be a planet like ours which has the perfect mixture of gases and temperature ranges that can sustain life." Apparently the "Father" of String Theory needs to brush up on recent evidence that shows the odds of a planet like Earth are literally astronomical, in fact, so big that the figure outnumbers the number of known planets in the cosmos.

Susskind then asked himself, "Why did I wake up this morning as an intelligent creature?" "Simple answer: If I wasn't intelligent, I wouldn't have thought about that this morning." Wow, my head is spinning from that elegant and nonsensical answer.

Stuart Burgess writes in True.Origin about the IC of the knee joint. Makes you wonder how natural selection pulled this one off.

Darla Slipke, of the University (of Kansas) Daily Kansan, reports on the lecture given by Richard Dawkins in Lawrence. The talk was decidely anit-ID, and praised the wonder of natural selection.

At the Zarinha Cultural Center, in Joao Pessoa, Brazil, Enezio E. de Almeida Filho will give an ID talk and have a debate. The event will take place on Oct. 21st at 7:30 p.m. The link above is in Portuguese.

In the World Peace Herald, Sekai Nippo reports on ID favorably in a five part series. All five parts can be accessed from the above link...and scrolling down the page.

PBS's Think Tank welcomed Dr. Stephen Meyer, director of the Discovery Institute's Center for Science and Culture and author of Darwinism, Design and Public Education and Dr. Michael Ruse, Director of the Program in the Philosophy of the History of Science at Florida State University for a discussion on biological history, etc.

Wednesday, October 11th was a historic day in the life of the European Parliament.

Polish member of the European Parliament, Maciej Giertych, retired head of the Genetics Department of the Polish Academy of Science, and father of Polish Deputy Prime Minister, Roman Giertych, introduced a public seminar on the General Theory of Evolution to fellow MEP's.

Professor Giertych questioned the value of teaching a continually falsified hypothesis - macroevolution - to students throughout Europe, as well as pointing out its lack of usefulness in regard to scientific endeavour.

Professor Giertych introduced the subject by relating how his children had returned home from school having been taught about the theory of evolution. They were told that the proof of macroevolution - the common ancestry of biological life - was to be found in the science of genetics. This was news to Professor Giertych who had spent his life working at the highest level of genetic research. He revealed to the meeting that such proof does not exist in genetics, only disproof.

This was reinforced by the speech of Professor Emeritus Joseph Mastropaolo who had travelled from the USA to participate in the Brussels hearing. He explained that the biological sciences offer no empirical proof of macroevolution, just insurmountable problems. The theory of evolution consists merely of interpretational evidences which by their very nature could be interpreted in many different ways. He told the audience that the theory, after more than 150 years, still lacked any empirical proof.

Dr. Hans Zillmer, a German Palaeontologist and member of the New York Academy of Sciences, told the meeting that the fossil record holds no proof for evolution theory either. Instead of showing gradual change from one species to another, as is often claimed in the classroom, it actually reveals the stasis and stability of life forms.

Amongst those helping to organise the historic seminar were Dr. Dominique Tassot, Director of Centre d'Etude et de Prospectives sur la Science (C.E.P). C.E.P. is an organisation consisting of 700 French speaking scientists, intellectuals and representatives of other professions, all of whom oppose evolutionary theory on scientific grounds.

Evolution News & Views reports on the meeting of Jonathan Wells and Michael Shermer at the CATO Institute.

DNA World reports that Poland's deputy education minister called for the influential evolutionary theories of Charles Darwin not to be taught in the country's schools, branding them as lies in comments published on Saturday.

"The theory of evolution is a lie, an error that we have legalised as a common truth," Miroslaw Orzechowski, the deputy minister in the country's right-wing coalition government, was quoted as saying.

Colson noted that A Meaningful World is "about so much more than the narrow concept that many people have of 'intelligent design.' Their book's subtitle helps explain their idea - How the Arts and Sciences Reveal the Genius of Nature. It's an original and utterly fascinating approach to the subject.

It available on ARN by clicking HERE.

Those who like Paley's watchmaker analogy as an argument for design will enjoy this animated poem for kids.

This week on Think Tank - Intelligent Design vs. Evolution, Part One.

Host Ben Wattenberg is joined by Dr. Stephen Meyer, director of the Discovery Institute’s Center for Science and Culture and Dr. Michael Ruse, Director of the Program in the Philosophy of the History of Science at Florida State University.

Tim Martin, of the Detroit Free Press, reports that the State Board of Education on Tuesday approved public school curriculum guidelines that support the teaching of evolution in science classes, but not intelligent design.

Intelligent design instruction could be left for other classes in Michigan schools. But it should not have a home in science class, based on the unanimously adopted guidelines.

The Garaventa Center for Catholic Intellectual Life and American Culture at the University of Portland will host a panel titled "Evolution, Intelligent Design and God: The Conversation Continues."

The panel discussion is set for 2 p.m. Saturday, Oct. 28 in Buckley Center Auditorium on the University of Portland Campus, 5000 N. Willamette Blvd. Panel members will be John Haught, Peter Dodson, and Michael Behe.

Click the title above to purchase the book from ARN.

Dr. Jonathan Wells will be in Washington, DC promoting his new book, "The Politically Incorrect Guide to Darwinism and Intelligent Design" (Regnery, 2006) at the following public appearances:

WEDNESDAY, OCTOBER 11

5:30 - 7:00 PM: Book party, Discovery Institute DC Office, 1015 Fifteenth Street NW, Suite 900, 202-558-7058. For free registration call the preceding number or email lgage@discovery.org.

THURSDAY, OCTOBER 12

Noon - 1:30 PM: Debate with Michael Shermer, CATO Institute, 1000 Massachusetts Avenue NW, 202-842-0200. For free registration call
202-789-5229 or email events@cato.org.

7:00 PM: Book signing at Books-A-Million, 1451 Chain Bridge Road, McLean, VA, 703-893-7640.

Download this paper written by Johnny Rex Buckles of the University of Houston Law Center.

This letter appeared in the Muskegon Chronicle. A simple, yet effective way to "put a stone" in the shoe of each person who will consider ID.

It was in a high school science classroom that Lee Strobel became an atheist. A lecture on the Miller-Urey experiment convinced him that the origin of life, and all life for that matter, could be explained by purely naturalistic processes. Only the hard, empirical evidence of science could be trusted—and it appeared to point to a universe created by purely naturalist processes: time, chance, and Darwinian evolution.

Although science led Strobel away from a belief in a Creator, it was science that led him back. The atheistic worldview deeply influenced Strobel’s academic years and early career as an award-winning journalist for the Chicago Tribune. Then, in 1980, his wife’s conversion to Christianity led him on an intensive search for the truth about God and our beginnings. Not surprisingly, it began with science.

The Case for a Creator is the third in a series of top quality, block-buster documentaries on Intelligent Design by Illustra Media that started with Unlocking the Mystery of Life and The Privileged Planet. Based on Strobel’s popular book by the same title, the documentary leads you through one man’s journey to grapple with the scientific evidence regarding one of life’s greatest questions: How did we get here? Along the way he interviews many of the leading scientists and scholars for the intelligent design theory including Stephen C. Meyer, Michael Behe, Jay Richards, Jonathan Wells, Robin Collins, William Lane Craig, Guillermo Gonzalez, and Scott Minnich. The major topic areas of the documentary cover the fossil evidence, cosmology, astronomy, physics, biological machines and biological information. The bonus material includes additional interviews with the scientists, and special units on the origin of life and the machinery of life.

As with previous Illustra Media documentaries, this one is chock full of stunning graphics, amazing animations, and a theater-worthy soundtrack. The focus of this documentary is the scientific and philosophical evidence for design and a theistic worldview, and is suitable for use in public schools, especially when shown to balance the atheistic Darwinian worldview found in many educational scientific documentaries on the topic.

Both programs, part of the university’s President's Forum on Current Issues and Controversies, are free and open to the public on November 6th and 7th.

In the DetNews, Scott Bahr opines on the "faith" required by both Darwinists and IDers. In fact, both theories have a degree of uncertainty, and the scientific evidence points to one as being the most reasonable explanation. We claim the evidence is much in favor of ID.

Evolution News & Views reports of the USF conference. Of interest are complaints from a Darwinist, and the careful critique of the criticism.

The article in ScienceDaily starts out by saying that "DNA's simple and elegant structure — the 'twisted ladder,' with sugar-phosphate chains making up the 'rails' and oxygen - and nitrogen - containing chemical 'rungs' tenuously uniting the two halves — seems to be the work of an accomplished sculptor. Yet the graceful, sinuous profile of the DNA double helix is the result of random chemical reactions in a simmering, primordial stew."

Interesting, because there is no evidence in the geologic record that a primordial stew existed. And, note the blatant scientism assertion in the second sentence. No evidence required. It's a fact.

The Cato Institute will feature the author, Michael Shermer, Director, Skeptics Society, with comments by Jonathan Wells, Senior Fellow, Center for Science and Culture, Discovery Institute on Oct. 12th.

Any IDers in the area could ask some questions of Shermer.

Mark Pitsch, of the Louisville Courier-Journal, reports that outgoing Kentucky Education Commissioner Gene Wilhoit says it would be a mistake for the state Board of Education to hire a replacement who believes "intelligent design" should be taught in public schools.

That's because intelligent design promotes a specific religious viewpoint that can't be tested by science, he said. The idea that some complex biological structures and other aspects of nature show evidence of a creator.

"Intelligent design at this point has not been shown to be a scientific theory that can stand the test," Wilhoit said in an interview Friday. "

What Mr Wilhoit fails to point out is that there is such a thing as historical science. It's not repeatable, yet is science.

Melanie Ave, of the St. Petersburg Times, reports on the three-hour symposium sponsored by the Clearwater advocacy group, Physicians and Surgeons for Scientific Integrity. The group believes the origins of life are too complex to attribute to evolution's tenets of natural selection and random mutation.

The group was biochemist Michael Behe, one of the nation's most prominent supporters of intelligent design, and author of Darwin's Black Box; research scientist Ralph Seelke; and embryologist Jonathan Wells, author of The Politically Incorrect Guide to Darwinism and Intelligent Design.

Panel emcee Tom Woodward, a Trinity College professor and author of Doubts About Darwin, said evolution is inadequate to explain the creation of life. "We have never yet discovered any occasion in the known history of this universe where unintelligent causes, natural causes ... have produced" complicated life forms, Woodward said. "If there were a known occurrence, the guy would get three Nobel Prizes. It would be a major discovery."

Just one more reminder of the conference in the Tampa Bay area tonight.

And...a hearty congratulations to Frank Beckwith for being granted tenure at Baylor University!

It seems tarantulas have the ability to spin silk from both their abdomens and their FEET. This recent discovery has Darwinists spinning tales of which ability came first, as reported in Creation-Evolution Headlines.

The Wichita Eagle picks up on an AP story about a judge who struck down a Dover, Penn., school board's decision to teach intelligent design in public schools. Judge Jones said he was stunned by the reaction, which included death threats and a week of protection from federal marshals.

The judge spoke at the University of Kansas' Difficult Dialogues at The Commons series, which includes several speakers who will discuss the evolution and intelligent design debate.

In WordNewDaily, Johnathan Wells writes a succinct article on the current state of what the Darwinists are trying to do, and how desperate some of them have become.

A reminder of the upcoming conference sponsored by Physicians and Surgeons for Scientific Integrity on the 29th of September.

An excellent summary of what has been occurring in Michigan over the past days by Rob Crowther of the Discovery institute. One candidate for governor has suggested that it be a good idea for students to be exposed to other claims regarding earth's biological history besides Darwinism. The school board is also considering taking up the idea of allowing teachers to mention ID in classrooms. The Darwinistas are blowing fuses.

On the Creation-Evolution Web site, a teachable moment for kids about ID.

The Discovery Institute reports on Ken Miller's recent presentation at the University of Kansas against intelligent design. He discussed Kansas evolution education and promoted his theistic evolutionist viewpoint. Indeed, P.Z. Myers has attacked Ken Miller for promoting his theistic evolutionist views during the talk.

Kathy Barks Hoffman of the Detroit Free Press, reports that Republican gubernatorial candidate Dick DeVos thinks Michigan's science curriculum should include a discussion about intelligent design.

The Discovery Institute needs to supply letters for the misleading and false statements made in the above two papers. Others around the nation should do likewise.

Another instance of the amazing complexity of the genome and its surrounding that declares design from CREV headlines.

Jeffrey Joe Pe-Aguirre. of Capital News Service reports that School administrators in St. Joseph County Michigan are anticipating difficulties implementing the revised science curriculum that the state Board of Education will try to finalize in October.

One possible source of controversy is whether evolution, intelligent design and creationism all fall within the pale of the science curriculum, said Shelli Weisberg, legislative director of the American Civil Liberties Union of Michigan.

"At every juncture that this Legislature has looked at science education, they've attempted to put in language that will accommodate the teaching of intelligent design and creationism in science classes," one educator said.

CBC Newsworld (Television)
Wednesday, Sept. 20 and Thursday Sept. 21st

10:00 p.m. - Midnight p.m. (repeats 1:00 a.m. - 3 a.m) The Big Picture with Avi Lewis. Times are EDT.

Evolutionary theorist Richard Dawkins puts Religion on trial.

A public lecture by Ronald Numbers, Hilldale Professor of the History of Science and Medicine Department of Medical History and Bioethics, University of Wisconsin will take place on Sept. 29th at Princeton.

Casey Luskin of the Discovery Institute, further comments on Barbara Forrest's account on the Kitzmiller (Dover) trial of last year.

Casey Luskin, of the Discovery Institute, posted a comprehensive response to Chris Mooney's book, The Republican War on Science, which harshly attacks ID in chapter 11.

A conference at the University of South Florida in the Sun Dome will take place later this month. Click the link above for details.

Thursday, September 14, Johnathan Wells will be debating Michael Shermer (Why Darwin Matters: The Case Against Intelligent Design, Henry Holt 2006) on The Mike Rosen Show, KOA 850 AM (Denver, CO) from 10-Noon Mountain time.

The following day (Friday, September 15) Well,s will be debating Chris Mooney (The Republican War on Science, Basic Books 2005) on The Michael Medved Show, KTTH 770 AM (Seattle, WA) from 1-2 PM Pacific time. The call-in number for Medved's show is 1-800-955-1776.

Medved's show is nationally syndicated.

The Discovery Institute weighs in on some comments made by the Akron Beacon-Journal on the state of science education in Ohio.

Read the commentary in Evolution News & Views.

On the Web site ANSA.it, it is reported that the Pope says that "Accounts about Man don't add up without God." Pope Benedict XVI on Monday apparently issued his strongest criticism yet of evolutionary theory, calling it "unreasonable" .

Speaking to a 300,000-strong crowd in this German city, the former theological watchdog said that, according to such theories derived from Charles Darwin's work, the universe is "the random result of evolution and therefore, at bottom, something unreasonable".

Dr. Douglas Groothuis reviews Johnathan Well's new book The Politically Incorrect Guide to Darwinism and Intelligent Design.

It points out some of the errors in thinking coming from the other side.

The book is available through ARN by clicking HERE.

Kelly Hearn, of National Geographic News, reports on research by Australians. The fly's eyes hold an important blueprint for creating better video cameras, military target-detection systems, and surveillance equipment, Australian researchers say.

Amazing what the "Holy Grail" of time and chance can accomplish?

Johnathan Wells new book is doing well, and Evolution News & Views remarks on the success and good reviews.

ScienceDaily reports on research from Cornell University on how and why protein folding occurs.

Some would marvel at irreducible complexity, others would bow to luck and seemingly creativity of "unlimited" time.

Patrick Cain, of the Akron Beacon Journal, reports that the state school board will consider whether the debate over intelligent design vs. evolution should be revisited.

At the request of the board, the Ohio Department of Education drafted a nine-page "Controversial Issues Template."

Supporters say the template provides guidelines for discussion; opponents say the document is another attempt to single out and cast doubt on widely accepted scientific theories.

GlobeLens offers a short interview with Biola professor John A. Bloom on science and methodological naturalism.

Lucy Sherriff, writing for The Register, says the Vatican will publish the minutes of the Pope's recent meeting with his former doctoral students in which he discussed the Catholic Church's position on the origins of life, evolution, and creationism.

The meeting was called, aides say, not to align the Catholic Church with the Intelligent Design camp from the U.S., but to revive a public discussion of faith and reason.

From Casey Luskin of the Discovery Institute, the third installment.

From Reuters, here is one account of the Pope's meeting which discussed evolution.

Ian Fisher's story in the New York Times reports on the large interest generated by the Pope's meeting on science-Evolution and ID

Casey Luskin, of the Discovery Institute, weighs in on recent comments by Barbara Forester on "quote mining" by ID proponents.

The Darwin vs. Design debate seems to be playing out in unique ways in the exploding video culture of YouTube with these music videos by Pearl Jam (Do the Evolution) and Five for Fighting (The Riddle).

John L. Allen Jr. writes in The Catholic Register about some details of the Pope's upcoming science meeting. The continued melding of Creationism and ID is a bit frustrating, but, perhaps that will get ironed out.

John Hooper of The Guardian, writes that philosophers, scientists and other intellectuals close to Pope Benedict will gather at his summer palace outside Rome this week for intensive discussions that could herald a fundamental shift in the Vatican's view of evolution.

There have been growing signs the Pope is considering aligning his church more closely with the theory of "intelligent design" taught in some US states.

I didn't know that ID was being taught in public schools in some US states. Maybe it's just being taught to people in some US states. Oh my!

In the Univeristy of Virginia Alumni Magazine, Margaret B. Edwards explored ID and Evolution. The link above is the article.

The article sparked letters from both the sympathetic and angry. For the letters in the Fall 2006 issue, click HERE.

As reported by Zenit News Agency, Cardinal Christoph Schönborn is proposing an ideology-free debate on the theory of evolution, and wants to clarify the Church's position on the topic.

At a press conference Wednesday, the cardinal, explained that the Church does not hold the position of "creationist" theories on the origin of life and man, which draw scientific consequences from biblical texts.

In fact, he added, there is "no conflict between science and religion," but, rather, a debate "between a materialist interpretation of the results of science and a metaphysical philosophical interpretation."

Denis Greenan on the ANSAit Web site reports that Pope Benedict XVI is to brainstorm on evolution with a top theologian accused of championing controversial theories that trash Darwin.

The theologian, Vienna Archbishop Christoph Schoenborn, announced the September 1-3 session at a Catholic rally this week where he reaffirmed his belief that the universe could not have come about in a random way.

On the Creation-Evolution Web site, naturalists will be breathing heavy over the fact that there was probably plenty of oxygen in early earth history.

The problem with oxygen is that it is highly reactive and destructive to prebiotic chemicals. None of the amino acids or other "building blocks of life" famous from the Miller experiment and similar tests would have formed in the presence of oxygen.

According to David Klinghoffer, who writes in Beliefnet, if you have faith in God (intelligent Designer) as the Creator, you can't embrace Darwinism too, despite what some scientists claim.

Read on...

Saturday, August 26th at 7pm EST C-SPAN's BookTV will air "Traipsing Into Evolution: Intelligent Design and the Kitzmiller vs. Dover Decision", featuring two of the book's authors, John West and Casey Luskin. The program will air again Sunday, August 27th at 6:30am EST and Monday, August 28 at 12:00am EST.

Kenneth R. Weiss, of the LA Times, writes that the runoff from modern life is feeding an explosion of primitive organisms. This 'rise of slime,' as one scientist calls it, is killing larger species and sickening people.

It's a strain of cyanobacteria, an ancestor of modern-day bacteria and algae that flourished 2.7 billion years ago.

Some of the most advanced forms of ocean life are struggling to survive while the most primitive are thriving and spreading. Fish, corals and marine mammals are dying while algae, bacteria and jellyfish are growing unchecked. Where this pattern is most pronounced, scientists evoke a scenario of evolution running in reverse, returning to the primeval seas of hundreds of millions of years ago.

But why hadn't the most advanced forms evolved adequate defense mechanisms against this "primitive" life form eons ago?

In a story picked up by Beliefnet, Stacy Meichtry of Religion News Services reports that Pope Benedict XVI has appointed a new director of the Vatican Observatory. Rev. George Coyne, a long-serving Jesuit astronomer and a vocal opponent of "intelligent design" theory was replaced.

It was unclear if the replacement of Coyne, the observatory's director since 1978, reflected a sense of disapproval within the Vatican over his opposition to intelligent design.

This article was published in PNAS online.

Design or dumb luck?

The Guardian (UK) reports that Opinionpanel Research's survey of more than 1,000 students found a third of those who said they were Muslims and more than a quarter of those who said they were Christians supported creationism. Nearly a third of Christians and 10% of those with no particular religion favoured intelligent design.

The Kansas City Star picked up on this story about Arkansas candidate's tolerance of ID being taught in the schools.

Most Republican candidates in Arkansas told the newspaper that teachers shouldn't be required to teach intelligent design - but that "academic freedom" should allow instructors to address the subject in class.

This seems reasonable and in line with a liberal view of education.

Vail resident Dr. Gene Bammel, a retired philosophy professor, has been sparring in the commentary pages of the Vail Daily News with local preacher and occasional columnist Bob Branden, whose fundamentalist views on evolution have generated scores of letters and comments.

Bammel will be the featured speaker at a Vail Symposium "Hot Topics" series with a talk labeled "Darwin in the 21st Century: the Intelligent Design Debate."

Bammel says, "there's an aggregate of scientists who say they're in the business to produce evidence, and who say, as scientists, that they're limited by natural and physical explanations of how the world operates."

Kathimerini, the English language version Greece's International Newspaper, reports that around 250 university academics have prepared a petition asking the government to improve the teaching of Darwin’s theory of evolution at Greek schools.

A petition was signed because the academics think the theory is not taught properly in high school even though it is “the uniting framework of the science of biology” and has “priceless educational value.”

The teaching of the theory of evolution has not been banned in Greece but it is not included in senior high textbooks and although it is part of the course material for junior high school students, they are not tested on it at end-of-year exams.

The Akron Beacon Journal reports that supporters of teaching Darwin's theory of evolution to school children have launched a campaign aimed at unseating a state Board of Education member who has supported critical evaluation of the theory.

Nine members on the 19-member board will see their four-year terms expire at the end of this year, with voters going to the polls in November to fill five of the vacancies and the others to be appointed by the next governor.

The author of this article, in Pravda, Babu G. Ranganathan, has his B.A. with academic concentrations in Bible and Biology. As a religion and science writer he has been recognized in the 24th edition of Marquis Who's Who In The East.

He takes on many of the claims of Darwinists. He addresses misconceptions about entropy. How much evolution is naturally possible? Are there genetic limits to biological change? Can mutations (random changes) in the genetic code caused by the environment overcome these genetic barriers?

In case you have not heard, the book we have been waiting for has arrived: The Politically Incorrect Guide to Darwinism and Intelligent Design. It's available at ARN by clicking the link above.

The quote above from Ghandhi is worth more than a passing thought. Evolution News & Views discusses the coming of the Visgoths. ARN has merchandise which you can view on our home page. Also, a letter to the editor of the Washington Post by Casey Luskin of the Discovery Institute can be viewed.

This is a good post by Joe Carter in the Evangelical Outpost. The link to Part II is at the end of the post.

Just to give you an idea on how the "others" think, Taner Edis, writing for the Committee for the Scienctific Investigation on Claims of the Paranormal, starts off with a bang.

Edis comments, "Science no longer treats nature, particularly life, as a supernatural design. Today, the very mention conjures up images of young-Earth creationists with their bizarre scriptural literalism."

"Lately, an "Intelligent Design" (ID) movement has been emerging, trying to steer a course between the inconsequential handwaving of the liberals and the lunatic literalism of the creationists." So what do you really think, Dr Edis?

What follows is a fair look at ID, a discussion of Godel's Theorem, and the ultimate innovator, randomness. Darwin "wins" in the end.

David Klinghoffer of the Discovery Institute reviews the new book by the head of the Human Genome Project, Francis Collins, in the Weekly Standard. Collins is among the country's foremost authorities on genetics, a staunch Darwinist, and a prominent critic of Intelligent Design. He's also an evangelical Christian who dramatically describes the moment he accepted Jesus as his personal savior. If that sounds like it might be a paradox, read on.

Collins, for as brilliant as he is, has some muddled ideas on stem-cell research, Darwinism, and similar topics. According to Collins, taking the life of an newly formed embryo has moral implications, yet when it comes to the thousands of frozen embryos, why not just toss them out. Darwinian evolution is a random, purposeless, unguided process, defined by staunch Darwinists. So, how does "God" fit in?

The Sunday editorial in the Washington Post is as materialistic as it gets. Suggesting we may have finally emerged from the "Victorian Era"...but wait, those silly "creationists" just won't give in.

Chuck Colson writes an opinion in Townhall.com on how science lost in Kansas due to zealots who want to keep kids in the dark about the scientific controversy over evolution.

Kenneth Sibler, writing on the Technology, Commerce, and Society Web site, addresses the fact that Darwinists are beginning to engage with society on the "problems" of ID. He mentions a few new pieces written in favor of mutation and natural selection.

Trouble is, these pieces really add nothing to the ongoing "debate". Nearly all of the evidence presented for the history of Evolution is equivocal.

In the search for the Truth of reality, all explanations should be allowed to be brought to the table and discussed. We are searching for the Truth, not some restricted explanation of reality that does not allow for metaphysical existence (which science cannot deal with). What if there is an intelligence, even metaphysical, which caused the cosmos to come into existence, and scientism continues to waste time searching for a naturalistic explanation for what really is a metaphysical concern? Furthermore, the naturalists are overstepping the proper domain of scientific inquiry when they propose multiverses, etc. They cannot have it both ways.

Too bad the up-and-coming cannot have a widespread learning program where they can be taught how to search for ultimate reality. Scientism continues to be able, with taxpayer dollars, to indoctrinate students with their philosophical worldview with no fear of official reprisal.

Sandro Magister reports on an upcoming seminar with the pontiff and students. It will occur in early September.

The Pope has written that "while most scientists accept natural selection and random genetic mutation as valid processes, others who also accept evolution deny that the mechanisms identified so far are sufficient to explain it."

The subject is not foreign to Benedict XVI. As pontiff he touched upon it last April 6 when he addressed young people gathered in St. Peter’s Square for World Youth Day. "Science," he said, "presupposes the trustworthy, intelligent structure of matter, the 'design' of creation."

In National Review Online, David Klinghoffer of the Discovery Institute, weighs in on the outright fabrications by scientists and the media that got three Darwinist supporters elected to the Kansas School Board Tuesday.

LiveScience.com reports on the Kansas state school board primary.

If ever there was a misleading title to a press release, the above would be it.

Dr Robert D. Nicholls remarks, "Discussion over evolution and Intelligent Design really has centered on whether pseudogenes, sometimes called ‘junk DNA,’ have a function or not. The suggestion is that an Intelligent Designer would not make junk DNA, so if a pseudogene does have a function, this is claimed to support the idea of an Intelligent Designer."

A certain pseudogene was found to not have the function that was claimed for it, therefore, it doesn't have a function. What is wrong with this "line" of thought? Again, notice when you read the press release that the data did not suggest it had no function. The data suggested that it did not have the proported function and the researchers assumed that it had no function as was originally thought (through the scientism filter).

How can you argue for your point of view when this kind of "logic" is used against you?

Peter Slevin of the Washington Post reports that a shift of two seats to moderate Republicans - or to Democrats - in November almost certainly would lead to a reversal of state science standards celebrated by many religious conservatives and reviled by the scientific establishment.

The Discovery Institute, is, among other activities, running radio advertisements in support of the standards.

The editor of Scientific American, John Rennie - who has described the board's conservatives as "six dimwits" - posted on a blog to urge Kansas voters to defeat board members "who have inflicted embarrassing creationist nonsense on your home's science curriculum standards."

Ralph Blumenthal of the NY Times, reports on the controversy that apparently should not exist in Kansas and elsewhere.

According to Blumenthal, "A defeat for the conservative majority in Kansas on Tuesday could be further evidence of the fading fortunes of the intelligent design movement, while a victory would preserve an important stronghold in Kansas."

Never mind that we are seeking the Truth of reality, and apparently the only instance in space-time that staggering information is discovered (biology), mind did not precede this information. Yes, it is all about information, and that information is not directly tied to the chemicals.

Sophia Maines of the Lawrence World Journal reports on a lecture series planned at Kansas University, "Knowledge: Faith & Reason". The series claims to feature some of the key players in the evolution and intelligent design debate, but, so far, only Michael Behe has been announced on the ID side.

"We’ve had debates," said Leonard Krishtalka, director of KU's Biodiversity Institute and veteran to the evolution debate. "I don’t think we’ve had intelligent discussion. This is an attempt to have intelligent dialogue with the larger community and Kansas on a controversial subject." By controversial, he must mean outside of the scientific community, because, according to Darwinist scientists, there is no controversy. And, this is why there will be no debating.

While the title of these pieces by Dr. Sam Vaknin, found in the Global Politician, may not seem to touch ID at a deeper level, they do. Intelligent design is delegitimized with almost a "wave of the hand". Self-organization of matter and energy is asserted, which leads to complexity, and, therefore, ID debunked rather easily, according to Dr. Vaknin.

Here are two mantras:

"Complexity does not, therefore, imply the existence of a designer or a design. Complexity does not imply the existence of intelligence and sentient beings. On the contrary, complexity usually points towards a natural source and a random origin."

"DNA is far from optimized - it contains inordinate amounts of junk. Our bodies come replete with dysfunctional appendages and redundant organs. Lightning bolts emit energy all over the electromagnetic spectrum. Pulsars and interstellar gas clouds spew radiation over the entire radio spectrum. The energy of the Sun is ubiquitous over the entire optical and thermal range. No intelligent engineer - human or not - would be so wasteful."

Robert Lee Holtz, of the LA Times, praises three books which celebrate Darwinism, and lobs artillery shells of bombastic rhetoric at ID.

He opens with, "In the border war between science and faith, the doctrine of "intelligent design" is a sly subterfuge — a marzipan confection of an idea presented in the shape of something more substantial. As many now understand — and as a federal court ruled in December — intelligent design is the bait on the barbed hook of creationist belief, intended to sidestep legal restrictions on the teaching of religion in public-school science classes. The problem is not its underlying theology — a matter properly left to individual religious belief — but its disingenuous masquerade as a form of legitimate scientific inquiry." There is no doubt where this article/opinion piece is going.

In one of the three books, Stanford University physicist Leonard Susskind writes, "Whether or not evolution is compatible with faith, science and religion represent two extremely different worldviews, which, if they coexist at all, do so most uncomfortably. Today, in the United States, science and religion are in an angrier struggle than at any time within living memory. In itself, an intellectual battle of ideas is not at all a bad thing. But what I and many other people find deeply disturbing are the mechanisms that drive the conflict. It seems that both sides are pawns in a bigger game, a game of politics and power."

The "angrier struggle" from the Darwinist's perspective is due to the fact that Darwinian thought is crumbling at its very foundation. Stubbornness is rampant, and a worldview is not easily given up.

Over the next several weeks, commericials will air in Kansas promoting teaching more about evolution. Listen to them from the Discovery Institute Web site Evolution & News.

ScienceDaily reports on the irreducible complexity of life's machines and life itself.

Of course, it happened through random mutation and natural selection...

David Klepper, of the Kansas City Star, writes on the coming battle on the political front in Kansas regarding state science standards.

A theist evolutionist weighs in on the intelligent design folk in Kansas, and claims they are taking God out of evolution. Keith B. Miller's opinion is in the Kansas City Star.

Darwinism is an atheistic worldview...while theistic evolution is not. But, theistic evolution is not Darwinism. Darwinism is an unguided, unintentional series of random mutations and natural selections.

Johnathan Witt, of the Discovery Institute, has an article in WorldNewDaily.

Darwinists try to squelch discussions of the weaknesses of their theory in a variety of ways.

Witt comments that the truly confident Darwinist should be eager to tell students, "Hey, notice these crucial unsolved problems in modern evolutionary theory. Maybe one day you'll be one of the scientists who discovers a solution."

Open up the dialogue, and offer a liberal education to high school students, in Kansas, and elsewhere.

Dr. Larry Arnhart, professor at Northern Illinois University, is interviewed by The American Thinker.

He asserts that Darwinism bolsters conservative views more that leftist views. Darwinism does not do the work that Arnhart claims.

The Creation - Evolution Web site comments on an interesting paper which was printed in the Proceeding of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States.

The mix of evolutionspeak and design wording is interesting.

Tnaya Foubert of the Canmore Leader reports on this years winner of the National Award of Excellence for Innovative Quilts from the Canadian Quilters Association.

One question for starters is who made the turtles and irreducibly complex life in the first place. Ms. West has been deceived by others and herself.

Patrick W. Gavin, in an editorial in the DC Examiner, examines the Discovery Institute book Traipsing in Evolution - Intelligent Design and the Kitzmiller vs. Dover Decision.

Tim Vandenack of the Hutchinson (KS) News reports that the Republican contenders for the District 5 seat on the Kansas Board of Education sounded off Tuesday on evolution.

Sarah Larkins of CNSNews reports that conservatives on Ohio's Board of Education are battling to reopen the debate over the teaching of the theory of evolution in the state's public schools. Their goal is to force curriculum changes that would also allow discussion of the intelligent design theory.

In Evolution News and Views, Sen. John McCain gives his thoughts on ID.

ScienceDaily reports that "the molecular machinery that starts the process by which a biological cell divides into two identical daughter cells apparently worked so well early on that evolution has conserved it across the eons in all forms of life on Earth."

Of course, one could also say that the sameness of the DNA switch was because the design was so magnificent that it was used by the intelligent designer in every kind of living cell.

ScienceDaily reports that scientists at Harvard University are the first to learn why the cornea, the clear window of the eye, is free of blood vessels - a unique phenomenon that makes vision possible. The key, say the researchers, is the unexpected presence of large amounts of the protein VEGFR-3 (vascular endothelial growth factor receptor-3) on the top epithelial layer of normal healthy corneas.

No wonder Darwin shuddered and felt cold when he considered the eye...and he did not know the half of it.

In the American Chronicle, Wayne Adkins comments on ID.

Dial up your baloney detector machine to full power.

Apparently people who believe in ID or Biblical Creationism have preconceived notions about reality, which bias their thought process and cause some of them to be dishonest.

He states, "the reason the Discovery Institute has to constantly battle the idea that intelligent design and creationism are inexorably linked is that creationism is the basis for, not an implication of, intelligent design. Those with any inclination towards honesty will continue to make that connection. But undoubtedly the Discovery Institute will not. Honesty is not one of their stated goals. Defending the traditional doctrine of creation is."

To be honest, Adkins has no grasp on the linkages and lack thereof between creationism and ID, unlike multitudes of others who see the obvious distinctions.

With tongue in cheek I say that the other side, including Wayne Adkins, is completely unbiased and their worldview has no affect on the conclusions they draw.

The title says it all...on the Discovery Institute Web site

Kansans will now be able to learn for themselves as three experts will explain why the revised standards were necessary at a series of free symposiums across Kansas. The efforts to mislead Kansas citizens about the state's new science standards will hopefully be curbed by these symposiums.

Erika Mellon, of the Knoxville (TN) News Sentinel, reports on two school board candidate's thoughts on the origins issue and how it should be taught in public schools.

Wow...

Candidate H. Lee Martin says, "the theory of evolution, which was even doubted by Darwin himself, is being taught as a fact. Let's face it, intelligent design is nothing but a code for creationism - let's call it what it is.

Okaaaaay??? Martin was also heard saying that the apple in his fruit bowl is identical to the orange in the same bowl.

He also says that the "bottom line is, there are so many holes in the theory of evolution that we need to teach creationism along with it."

Imagine if creationism was just as unfounded as Darwinism. According to his logic, teaching two bad ideas would be better than teaching one bad idea.

An opponent, Thomas Deakins says, "I've never even thought about that, to be honest."

It's reported that Deakins returned recently from his year-long trip to the planet Mars.

The Catholic Church has come out swinging in recent years AGAINST Darwinism.

Here's what the Pope now distributes on prayer cards:

We are not some casual and meaningless product of evolution. Each of us is the result of a thought of God. Each of us is willed, each of us is loved, each of us is necessary.

So all over the world, people will remind themselves of anti-Darwinism every day.

Read more insights by Denyse O'Leary in the blurb above on Evolutions News and Views on the DI Web Site.

Evolution News and Views on the Discovery Institute Web site reports on why ID is not mentioned in the Kansas Science Standards.

Hiram Caton, an Australian evolutionist is more candid than many Darwinists would want him to be. These articles, written within the past year contain some eye-opening remarks.

For the first article, click HERE.

For the second article, click HERE.

On the Discovery Institute's EvolutionNews it is shown that mathematics has a strong tradition of giving cogent critique of evolutionary biology. After all, Darwin's theory of evolution by natural selection is fundamentally based upon an algorithm which uses a mathematically describable trial and error process to attempt to produce complexity. Population genetics is rife with mathematics. In fact, one criticism of the alleged transitional fossil sequences for whales is that they represent evolutionary change on too rapid a timescale to be mathematically feasible. It seems that there is no good reason why those trained in mathematics cannot comment on the ability of the Neo-Darwinian mutation-selection process to generate the complexity of life.

As early as 1966 at the Wistar Symposium, it was pointed out by Stanislaw Ulam that Darwinism "seems to require many thousands, perhaps millions, of successive mutations to produce even the easiest complexity we see in life now. It appears, naively at least, that no matter how large the probability of a single mutation is, should it be even as great as one-half, you would get this probability raised to a millionth power, which is so very close to zero that the chances of such a chain seem to be practically non-existent."