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."

Discovery Institute’s "Stand up for Science, Stand up for Kansas" education campaign is intended to defend the excellent science standards adopted by the Kansas State Board of Education and to counter the campaign of misinformation by groups like Kansas Citizens for Science (KCFS), which are wildly distorting what the Kansas science standards actually say and do.

The following is a response to Kentucky Governor Ernie Fletcher's comments on ID.

Kentucky Governor Ernie Fletcher snubbed the Kentucky Academy of Science after they sent him a letter objecting to the teaching of Intelligent Design in the public school system.

The Governor responded that ID was a self-evident truth and that he was astounded and disappointed that so many of the so-called intellectual elite could not accept a truth that 90 percent of the population accepted.

While the environment of the planet earth is such as to allow the survival of the present life on earth, the thousands of plants and animals that have not survived should prove that they were not intelligently designed. Any objective evaluation of the earth's environment and the failure of species of plants and animals to survive, must lead to the conclusion that there is no intelligent designer. One can observe that plants and animals either adapt to the earth's environment or die out.

One has only to look at natural disasters and diseases to prove that no intelligent designer would do such a poor job. Any person, granted omnipotence and omniscience, could and would do a better job designing the universe and the life in it.

What is so frightening is to see people like Governor Fletcher governing our country.

John A. Henderson, MD

If the arrival of the fittest and the existence of natural suffering and pain were the only "evidences" that we had for the existence of a designer, then Dr. Henderson may have a leg to stand on.

However, the existence of a designer turns out to be a cumulative case, with many other evidences to consider; such as the fine-tuning of the cosmos to be fit for life in the first place, the irreducible complexity of organisms, historic events, etc.

And what is Dr. Henderson complaining about anyway? In his worldview of "the cosmos is all that is, or ever was, or ever will be", who's to say that suffering and pain are truly bad or evil? There would be no bad or evil, only benign events.

Dr. Henderson seems to claim to be more intelligent than the omniscient and omnipotent designer he mentions, saying that the designer would not do it this way. How would he know? Perhaps this is the best world possible within the framework of the laws of the cosmos?

Even in a theistic framework, in a cosmos where the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics is key, suffering and pain and death must occur. And according to some forms of theism, the cosmos is in a fallen mode.

Perhaps Dr. Henderson's concept of the designer is askew, and he should do some more investigtation.

A good start would be by looking at

ARN

or

Reasons to Believe

or

Stand to Reason

Catherine Candisky of the Columbus Dispatch reports that less than five months after evolution won a round in the State Board of Education, some board members want to reopen the debate.

Colleen Grady, a board member from the Cleveland suburb of Strongsville, wants to add guidelines to the state science standards for teaching on such topics as evolution, global warming, stem-cell research and cloning.

Grady said she views her proposal as a compromise to ensure that differing views are considered when teaching such hot-button issues.

Space Review's Anthony Young remembers the passing of one of the great scientists of the 20th century.

Von Braun was a believer in intelligent design in the Universe long before it became a catch phrase and a lightning rod of debate.

"For me, the idea of a creation is not conceivable without invoking the necessity of design," he wrote in a letter to the California State Board of Education in September 1972. He added, "It is in scientific honesty that I endorse the presentation of alternative theories for the origin of the universe, life and man in the science classroom. It would be an error to overlook the possibility that the universe was planned rather than happening by chance."

Would it be that all scientists were as clear-thinking as von Braun.

Gary Robertson, of the Richmond Times-Dispatch, reports on an adjunct professor at Virginia Commonwealth University who complained that an introductory biology textbook had leanings toward creationism and short-changed evolution.

Jim Sparks, a wildlife field biologist, says his contract was not renewed.

But Robert D. Holsworth, dean of the College of Humanities and Sciences at VCU, said Sparks never had a contract to begin with.

Holsworth said adjuncts are hired on an as-needed basis, and there was no negative decision made about Sparks as a result of his criticism of the textbook, titled "Essentials of Biology" published by McGraw-Hill.

The C.S. Lewis Society of California is an educational and cultural organization of people interested in events, publications, and other developments that advance deeper understanding of the life, works, and ideas of C. S. Lewis and others who address the enduring philosophical, cultural, historical, literary, theological, social, and economic issues of mankind.

Earl Watt, of the Liberal (KS) Southwest Daily Times, reports on science standards in Kansas.

Jack Krebs, a member of the Kansas Citizens for Science, said the origin of life has no place in the science standards.

Krebs said his organization has created an alternative set of standards for the State of Kansas to use, should the upcoming election create a change in the make-up of the current Kansas Board of Education.

Discovery senior fellow, technology guru and conservative economist George Gilder has a major essay in the new issue of National Review, entitled "Evolution and Me: Darwinian Theory has Become an All-Purpose Obstacle to Thought Rather than an Enabler of Scientific Advance."

Gilder’s penultimate point? "Wherever there is information there is a preceding intelligence."

A fascinating Web site showing the complexity of life by John Kyrk...

Casey Luskin, of the Discovery Institute, comments on a recent article co-authored by Ronald Numbers.

Judy Putnam, of the Saginaw Times, reports that lawmakers have booted a plan requiring science teachers to present competing theories of evolution and global warming from legislation after critics said it would require public schools to teach religious theories about creation.

The debate is not over though...

The London Times reports that ID and Creationism are entering university lecture halls, raising concerns with some academics that the biblical story of creation will be given equal weight to Darwin’s theory of evolution.

But there’s a twist. Lecturers will present the controversial theories as being incompatible with scientific evidence. "It is essential they (students) understand the historical context and the flaws in the arguments these groups put forward," says Michael McPherson, of Leeds University.

Click the above link to read the rest of the story...

Curtis Dahlgren, writing for Renew America starts off by quoting Dennis Prager: "The left believes in 'experts.' The liberal is bowled over by the title 'Nobel laureate.' The conservative is more likely to wonder why a Nobel laureate in physics has anything more meaningful to say about [issues] than, let us say, a taxi driver."

And so it goes. Learn why scientific materialists haven convinced may Americans about the scientific validity of Darwinism.

While this one was posted more than a month ago, it's worth another look.
Comments by Denyse O'Leary, on her blog.

How does Mother Nature do it?

Three cheers for Nature...She/He has done it again!

The Creation/Evolution Web site brings you "the rest of the story".

The Discovery Institute reports on the censorship of some medical journals with regard to pro-ID views.

ARN released a new ID T-Shirt and poster this week celebrating the publishing of a recent anti-ID book.

A recent book attacking intelligent design (Intelligent Thought: Science vs. the Intelligent Design Movement, ed. John Brockman, Vintage Press, May 2006), , has chapters by most of the big names in evolutionary thought: Daniel Dennett, Richard Dawkins, Jerry Coyne, Steven Pinker, Lee Smolin, Stuart A. Kauffman and others. In the introduction Brockman summarizes the situation from his perspective: materialistic Darwinism is the only scientific approach to origins, and the “bizarre” claims of “fundamentalists” with “beliefs consistent with those of the Middle Ages” must be opposed. “The Visigoths are at the gates” of science, chanting that schools must teach the controversy, “when in actuality there is no debate, no controversy.”

While Brockman intended the “Visigoths” reference as an insult equating those who do not embrace materialistic Darwinism to uneducated barbarians, he has actually created an interesting analogy of the situation, and perhaps a prophetic look at the future. For it was the Visigoths of the 3rd and 4th centuries that were waiting at the gates of the Roman Empire when it collapsed under its own weight. For years the Darwinists in power have pretended all is well in the land of random mutation and natural selection and that intelligent design should be ignored. With this book (and several others like it), they are attempting to both laugh and fight back at the ID movement. Mahatma Gandhi summarized the situation well with his quote about the passive resistive movement which appears on the back of the T-shirts: “First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win.” The Visigoths Are Coming image was created and copyrighted by political cartoonist Chuck Asay.

Join the Visigoth movement. Order your T-shirt today.

In Nature, Phillip Ball writes on a forthcoming paper by Stephen Hawking.

This is what is cooked up to explain away a beginning to this fine-tuned cosmos.

Eben Harrell of The Scotsman, writes on the scientific materialist's come back to creationism and ID.

The world's leading scientists have issued a damning statement against the teaching of creationism in schools, arguing that denying the facts of evolution damages the development of children.

The national science academies of 67 countries, including the Royal Society, issued a joint statement warning that scientific evidence about the origins of life was being "concealed, denied, or confused" in many schools.

It added that teaching children about Darwinian evolution and the natural world was integral to protecting the planet.

The teaching of any hint of intelligent design or supernaturalism now threatening civilization...

Over 600 doctoral scientists from around the world have now signed
a statement publicly expressing their skepticism about the contemporary
theory of Darwinian evolution. The statement reads: "We are skeptical of claims for the ability of random mutation and natural selection to account for the complexity of life. Careful examination of the evidence for Darwinian theory should be encouraged."

In the Stanford Medical Magazine, Mark Shwartz writes against ID, and quotes Eugenie Scott.

David Mulder responds to the opinion of Kerby Rials (a previous post) in the MSU State News.

David claims that, given enough time, valleys can become mountains so why can't one creature adapt to the environment and become another? There certainly has been enough time, right? No.

Wellllll...things like comparing apples to oranges and entropy pop into my head.

Op-ed piece resemble skipping stones over a deep lake of knowledge and truth. Stick to one point, and go for the sweet spot...

Christina Kauffman, of the York Dispatch, reports on the ousting of Dover school superintendent RIchard Nilsen.

"Your timing stinks", some residents said. The school board wants to replace Nilsen and Baksa in retaliation for intelligent design. The two administrators were in charge in 2004 when the former school board voted to require mention of intelligent design as an alternative to evolution in a ninth-grade biology class.

An opinion by Kerby Rials appears in the Michigan State University State News.

This entertaining piece makes sense...

On the Science & Theology Web site, a report on Conservatives Against Intelligent Design (CAID). CAID was founded to give a voice to Republicans, Independent Conservatives, and Libertarians across the country who stand opposed to the teaching of "intelligent design" and other forms of creationism in the classroom.

On the Creation-Evolution Web site a couple of stories of "negative correlation" regarding environmental pressures and evolution.

In case you were wondering...negative correlation is not good from a Darwinian perspective.

Read this article on how Darwinist simplify the origin of life on the Creation-Evolution Web site.

If it were not so foolish, it would be funny...

For a transcript or to listen, click the above link.

Steven Swinford of the London Times reports that the scientist who led the team that cracked the human genome is to publish a book explaining why he now believes in the existence of God.

Francis Collins, the director of the US National Human Genome Research Institute, claims there is a rational basis for a creator and that scientific discoveries bring man "closer to God".

"One of the great tragedies of our time is this impression that has been created that science and religion have to be at war," said Collins.

A symposium on science and intelligent design will be hosted Saturday, June 17, from 9 a.m. to 3 p.m. by the Salt Lake Theological Seminary, 699 E. South Temple.

For more information, click the link above.

Gary Robertson, of the Richmond Times-Dispatch, reports on a textbook flap in Virginia.

Jim Sparks, an adjunct biology professor at Virginia Commonwealth University, says the introductory biology textbook his students will use this fall leaves out important information about evolution.

Sparks said, "I don't want to give them a pile of crap. I want to give them a good education."

The Discovery Institute reports that South Carolina will be the fifth state to adopt science standards requiring critical analysis of evolution.

Christina Kauffman, of the York Dispatch, reports on the continuing fall-out from the Kitzmiller v. Dover decision.

In First Things, Stephen Barr, comments on the comments of Rev. George Coyne, S.J., director of the Vatican Observatory.

In a recent talk he asked, about life’s origins, "Do we need God to explain this? Very succinctly, my answer is no." Well, very succinctly, Barr things that statement is absurd.

Read this featured article for June and July.

Bill Robinson, of The State, reports that the SC state Board of Education today reaffirmed its stance in support of changes to high school biology standards that includes compromise language for teaching about the origins of life.

The unanimous vote clears the way for the Education Oversight Committee to take up the issue at its June 12 meeting. By law, the oversight panel has the final say in approving all instructional standards teachers follow in delivering day-to-day lessons that the school board develops.

Dr. Jean Lightner writes on the fact that evolutionists point to mutations as providing the raw material necessary for the onward, upward change they believe has occurred since life began. Mutations which affect an organism are often categorized into two basic types: loss-of-function mutations and gain-of-function mutations.

The majority of mutations are loss-of-function, and non-heritable.

Our thanks to Tom Graffagnino for passing on this fascinating news report and inspirational poem to commemorate this "breaking" news story on a great scientific discovery:

Recently, a team of geo-microbiologists at Penn State University discovered that the origin of life on Earth may not have dropped out of the blue via some sort of extra-terrestrial panspermian planting, or accidentally (magically?) popped into existence when lifeless primordial goo was zapped by a purposeless and random prehistoric lightning strike.

While experimenting in the lab, the Penn State scientists discovered that a lifeless microbe (Methanosarcina acetevorans) actually passed gas which conceivably ...(no pun intended!)....could have somehow attracted enough randomly available DNA/RNA-type molecules to itself to have produced real, self-replicating life on planet Earth!

According to this theory... (hold on to your "whoopie-cushion", folks)..., we are basically nothing more than the accidental (and unintelligently designed) offspring of tiny, dead microbial 'flatulence'.

(You may read about it here.)

Of course, you and I may chuckle at this latest "scientific" foray into the land of bizarre spiritual speculation and metaphysics, but apparently this is Fundamentalist Scientism's most recent chapter in her religious gospel Creation Myth.

The problem is, unlike most of us....the High Priests of Scientism don't appear to be laughing. In fact, they seem to be quite deadly serious.

Presumably, this latest "scientific" revelation and Creation Story will be discussed and batted around in our children's classrooms everywhere as if it were actually a plausible theory of the beginning of life.

New Age Scientism (aka, Macro-cadabra Evolutionism), meet your Metaphysical Mama: neo-pagan Alchemy.

How the "magik arts" have evolved!
(Idolatry warmed over and served yet again...)*

What a gas!

*

"Past Gas-R-Us!"
(Eerie Theory...Breaking Wind)

by Tom Graffagnino

Some say Time 'n' Space erupted
In a past gas incident...
But now Scientists inform us
Of a new passed-gas event!

Shocking news!
Simply explosive!
Guess where mankind got its start.....?!
Little microbes in deep water...
Tiny bubbles in the dark!

Something smells here...
Something's fishy!
Something odoriferous!
(This is Science!
Stop complaining!
You should know.....
Past Gas-R-Us!)

Gassy-Passion was in fashion,
Life emerged right then 'n' there!
Jet propulsion!
Fierce expulsion!
Rocket Science clears the air!

Mama Methane...
Poppa Carbon
Found an outlet, if you please...!
Life emerged from microbe gashes!
Thermal vent.....
Ol' factories!

Meat-Man's Laboratory Logos...
(Oh my Word!...It's Heaven-Scent!)
So, breath free, Ye True Believers...
Evo-Gas-God's Accident!

Holy Moses!
Hold yer noses!
Did you hear that "Missing Link"!?
Alchemy has come full circle,
And she's puttin' up a stink!

Please observe.....
There!....
Hot-Air-Rising!
Right from under Darwin's.... spell!
Praise Pollutin'-Tootin' Microbes!
(This shell-game's still selling well!)

Quite a neo-pagan hat-trick...
Like witchcraft we all thought dead!
Sacred life transformed from gasses,
Man! Like gold is made from lead!

Mumbo-jumbo speculation!
Conjured up idolatries;
Scientific wands-a-wavin'
Serving Mephistopheles!

PhD's.... inflatuated!
It's an Evo-Love Affair!
Darwin's brought 'em all together...
Cheek to cheek...
Without a care!

Holy Smoke!
They're on emission!
Gospel-spreading far and wide!
"Life's Creator was a microbe!"
(Mama-Gas, meet Human Pride.)

Give 'em all a huge ovation!
Here's your Nobel Prize, my friend...
For this strange Creation Story,
Eerie Theory....
Breaking Wind!

You deserve this lofty honor!
Yes, Ol' Bean, you should be proud!
You've been under lots of pressure....
Now we've heard you....
Clear and loud!

We admire your Nosey-Gnosis!
We applaud your expertise!
And your Gospel Vapor-Paper
Has us gasping on our knees!

***

There you have it, Lord.....
Have mercy!
Man's "intelligent design".
Yes, the "Brights" are out of theories...
And they're running out of time.

Lord, we love to worship Reason,
Because Reason starts with "ME"...
And a microbe-gas "creator"
Insures our Autonomy!

Accidental gas can't judge us...
And we like it just that way!
So we stick with Darwin's Dogma...
Then our Faith blows You away!

*

Many Darwinists and critics of ID would have you believe that intelligent design is a political invention of a few religiously motivated fundamentalists in the U.S. A recent Internet tool called ClustrMap helps to clarify this issue. It provides a pictorial map of accesses to a particular website. Take a look at who has been accessing the ARN website recently.

While this map reveals a worldwide interest in this topic, keep in mind it is only being accessed by an English reading audience. Now add to that the ClustrMap of this Brazilian ID website in Portuguese and you begin to see interest in ID is clearling "taking over the world." It would be fun to have a mega ClustrMap of the major ID websites in all the major languages. Our guess is the world would turn in to one giant red cluster.

Check out these QuickTime cell biology animations from Graham Johnson Medical Media. Click on any of the thumbnail graphics and an animation window will open up and the animiation will download and run if you have QuickTime loaded. In particular check out the second animation from the top (Pseudomanas infection of Lung epithelium). If you turn up your sound you’d think you were watching some kind of space invaders scifi movie! We can see the credits now...

Producer: Random Mutations
Director: Natural Selection
Cast: Assorted chemicals

Yeah, right.

Now that The Da Vinci Code movie has been released in the theaters, don't forget our video lecture by Ward Gasque that expounds point by point what great fiction the story is. Recent surveys reveal that 13% of Americans and 17% of all Canadians polled believed that Jesus was married and had children and 24% of French believe the story is based on facts. About 25% of those polled who read the book claimed it influenced their religious beliefs.

This is from a News Feature in Nature for May 25, 2006. "Gene" was the only concept in evolutionary theory that seemed to have a clear definition (compare with species, speciation, selection, fitness, etc.). Now the definition is being attacked as "a crude approximation" and scientists say "The degree of complexity we've seen was not anticipated."

Genetics: What is a gene?
Helen Pearson (Helen Pearson is a reporter working for Nature in New York).

Abstract
The idea of genes as beads on a DNA string is fast fading. Protein-coding sequences have no clear beginning or end and RNA is a key part of the information package, reports Helen Pearson.

Here are a few interesting quotes from this report:

"Rick Young, a geneticist at the Whitehead Institute in Cambridge, Massachusetts, says that when he first started teaching as a young professor two decades ago, it took him about two hours to teach fresh-faced undergraduates what a gene was and the nuts and bolts of how it worked. Today, he and his colleagues need three months of lectures to convey the concept of the gene, and that's not because the students are any less bright. "It takes a whole semester to teach this stuff to talented graduates," Young says. "It used to be we could give a one-off definition and now it's much more complicated.""

"An eye-opening study last year raised the possibility that plants sometimes rewrite their DNA on the basis of RNA messages inherited from generations past. A study on page 469 of this issue suggests that a comparable phenomenon might occur in mice, and by implication in other mammals. If this type of phenomenon is indeed widespread, it "would have huge implications," says evolutionary geneticist Laurence Hurst at the University of Bath, UK."

"All of that information seriously challenges our conventional definition of a gene," says molecular biologist Bing Ren at the University of California, San Diego. And the information challenge is about to get even tougher. Later this year, a glut of data will be released from the international Encyclopedia of DNA Elements (ENCODE) project. The pilot phase of ENCODE involves scrutinizing roughly 1% of the human genome in unprecedented detail; the aim is to find all the sequences that serve a useful purpose and explain what that purpose is. "When we started the ENCODE project I had a different view of what a gene was," says contributing researcher Roderic Guigo at the Center for Genomic Regulation in Barcelona. "The degree of complexity we've seen was not anticipated."

"Today's assault on the gene concept is more far reaching, fuelled largely by studies that show the previously unimagined scope of RNA."

The folks at Panspermia.org advocate that panspermia (life seeded from outer space) is an idea that traces back to the Greeks. It is one way to deal with the lack of evidence on earth for the chemical evolution of life, but doesn't it just beg the question? What is the source of the "genetic programs" that were seeded here from outerspace? This sounds more like design theory than an answer for the problems facing chemical evolution theory. At least these folks are a little more "honest" with the data than the chemical origin of life proponents. Here are a few snippets from their into page:

"Cosmic Ancestry is a new theory pertaining to evolution and the origin of life on Earth. It holds that life on Earth was seeded from space, and that life's evolution to higher forms depends on genetic programs that come from space. (It accepts the Darwinian account of evolution that does not require new genetic programs.) It is a wholly scientific, testable theory for which evidence is accumulating."

"We are calling the union of Lovelock's Gaia with Hoyle and Wickramasinghe's expanded theory of panspermia Cosmic Ancestry. This account of evolution and the origin of life on Earth is profoundly different from the prevailing scientific paradigm — the theory challenges not merely the answers but the questions that are popular today. Cosmic Ancestry implies, we find, that life can only descend from ancestors at least as highly evolved as itself. And it means, we believe, that there can be no origin of life from nonliving matter in the past. Without supernatural intervention, therefore, we conclude that life must have always existed. Although these conclusions cut across the boundaries between science, philosophy, and religion, we believe they are grounded in good evidence. In fact, new data that support many aspects of Cosmic Ancestry are coming in rapidly."

On Monday May 22, 2006 Dr. Cornelius Hunter and Dr. Michael Ruse debated on the topic “Evolution versus Intelligent Design: Scientific Assumptions in a Free Society” held by the Oregon State University Socratic Club. Adam Campbell, staff writer for the OSU Daily Barometer, provides a brief report.

On April 26, 2006 the Seattle Times Talk of the Times at Town Hall Seattle featured a debate over evolution and intelligent design between Discovery Institute CSC Director Stephen Meyer and US paleontologist Peter Ward. The event was sold out with 800+ in attendance for what turned out to be a really good debate. You can read a review of the debate here or watch it online here.

From ScienceDaily...

When scientists found 18,000-year-old bones of a small, humanlike creature on the Indonesian island of Flores in 2003, they concluded that the bones represented a new species in the human family tree that they named Homo floresiensis. Their interpretation was widely accepted by the scientific community and heralded by the popular press around the world. Because of its very short stature, H. floresiensis was soon dubbed the "Hobbit."

Increasingly, however, this controversial conclusion is being questioned. In a Technical Comment to be published in the May 19, 2006, issue of Science magazine, scientists led by Robert D. Martin, PhD, Field Museum Provost and world-class primatologist, say that the bones in question do not represent a new species at all. A far more likely explanation is that the bones belonged to a modern human who suffered from microcephaly, a pathological condition that causes small brain size, often associated with short stature.

A top-down systems approach to biology is yeilding new information about the complexity of the DNA repair mechanism.

Many cellular processes -- including DNA replication and repair, cell cycle control, metabolism, and stress responses -- form an integrated response to DNA damage, according to a report in this week's Science. The authors used a systems biology approach to create a map of transcriptional networks that are activated when yeast DNA is damaged.

"We now know an order of magnitude more pathway connections than were known before, as far as how information is transmitted through the cell in response to damage," senior author Trey Ideker of the University of California, San Diego, told The Scientist. Looking at cellular processes from a wide-angle view -- rather than the one-gene, one-protein approach of classical biology -- permits the construction of "a complete wiring diagram" of transcriptional interactions, Ideker said, which will help scientists control cellular response to DNA damage.

Peter Ward (coauthor of Rare Earth) was featured this week on an NPR broadcast claiming that the moon is the best place to look for evidence of the origin of life on earth because fossilized evidence from 3-4 billion years ago, which is missing on earth, may have wound up on the moon when meteors hit the earth. The skeptics reply that all we will find is moon dust, because with no atmosphere the earth fragments would have been pulverized when they slammed in to the moon. Ward countered that we should still find evidence of the early traces of life in the dust, and if so that means life formed easily and it will be found everywhere in the universe.

The chemical origin of life remains one of the largest "missing links" for the molecule-to-man theory of evolution. As every possible theory has been exhausted here on earth, reductionists have expanded the search to the moon, Mars and the universe in hopes of finding some shread of evidence to support their belief that life somehow spontaneously generated from non-life. We agree with Ward on one point. He called the origin of life the most important question in the cosmos! We agree. So lets teach our kids all the evidence pro and con and let them make up their own minds, rather than feeding them only government mandated reductionist fairytales.

You can listen to the NPR story here which has a bit of a fun scifi angle to it, which is probably the best way to present Ward's theories.

John Drake of the AP reports on an SC House committee considering an amendment that establishes how textbooks, software and other instructional materials are selected to require they "critically analyze" the subject matter.

It is the latest tactic by conservative lawmakers who want students to learn about problems in the theory of evolution.

Diane Hirth of the Tallahassee Democrat reports on the a forum to be held at Florida State University on intelligent design and the public schools.

ScienceDaily reports that there is a particular place inside a cell where proteins carry out their function. Scientists from the Charité Berlin, the University of Heidelberg, and the Max Planck Institute for Molecular Genetics in Berlin have now been able to visualize the structure of a "molecular machine" involved in protein sorting.

Intelligently designed? We think so...

Dr. Michael Behe will appear at the New York Cultural Center on May 31st with Dr. Michael Hanby of Baylor in a panel discussion.

Sahar Shakir reports that the UC Irvine community was given a chance to witness an intellectual debate aimed at broadening the perspective on the origins of life. "A Colloquium on Origins, Evolution and Intelligent Design" featured two experts on the origin theory of intelligent design; Paul Nelson, a senior fellow at the International Society for Complexity Information, and Ralph Seelke, professor of biology and earth sciences at the University of Wisconsin-Superior. Walter Fitch, professor of ecology and evolutionary biology at UCI, challenged them in favor of Darwinian evolution.

The event was sponsored by iDesign, a club focused on furthering the discussion of different contemporary theories on the origins of life and the universe, including that of intelligent design.

Author Tom Wolfe gave the annual Jefferson Lecture sponsored by the National Endowment for the Humanities. His two hour long speech (click the above link to read the entire speech) was entitled "The Human Beast."

In more words (sometimes explicitly stated) he said that determinism is true, there is no free will, there is no I , evolution is a fact, there is no nature to man, and God is dead. He spoke of Darwin, Freud, Marx, and Nietzsche as if speaking of a beloved children.

It good he has figured it all out for us. Now we can attend to other things.

The Washington Post covered the speech. Please click HERE for the story.

Phil Johnson was interviewed by Kim Minugh of the Sacramento Bee.

His 1991 book "Darwin on Trial" is credited with setting into motion a movement that has spawned nationwide battles over how evolution should be taught in public schools.

You may have to register withe the Bee to read this article.

The Discovery Institute reports on fresh questions about the potential for a dismissal of the Kitzmiller case based upon mootness, potentially allowing the Dover Area School Board to avoid a large attorneys' fees judgment against them by rescinding their intelligent design (ID) policy before Judge Jones issued his decision.

Tom Simonite, of NewScientist, writes on the amazing Namib desert beetle, which lives on the parched sands of southwest Africa, and collects drinking water using its wings. The wings are waxed and covered with an array of raised unwaxed bumps. The bumps strongly attract water, while the waxy areas repel it.

You wonder how the beetle survived before this astounding adaptation?

UPI reports that South Carolina lawmakers are again embroiled in the continuing evolution controversy to decide how textbooks should present scientific theory.

Supporters of two bills before the legislature claim they only want to ensure textbooks enhance students' development of critical thinking skills, The (Columbia, S.C.) State reported Tuesday.

Critics say "critical thinking skills" are code words for inserting religious theories like intelligent design into biology lessons.

So, if ID is a "religious" theory, so is SETI, and all forensic science?

Pervaiz Shallwani, of the Morning Call, reports that while ID will not be taught in the Palisades School District this year, it certainly could in the future and is something worth being educated on. So said 17-year-old Sarah Weick, president of the school's Students for Social Change Club.

The club, a socially conscious group of students who look to generate discussion on hot-button issues in this predominantly rural, Christian community, is sponsoring a debate on the topic at Palisades High School May 9th.

"We want to provide an open forum where experts can present their opinions to the community and then take questions," Weick said.

Amanda Jacobs, of the Columbia Missourian, reports that Rep. Jane Cunningham, R-Chesterfield, chairwoman of the House Elementary and Secondary Education Committee, said a bill made it through committee hearings by a 7-6 vote.

The Missouri Science Education Act would require sixth- through 12th-grade science teachers to engage in "critical analysis" of evolution as a theory rather than teaching it as an accepted fact.

WHAT: Critics of intelligent design will cross-examine intelligent design by asking its leading proponents the difficult questions in a Q-and-A format.

WHEN: Friday, May 12 at 7:30 p.m.

WHERE: Sutherland Auditorium at Biola University in La Mirada, Calif.

BACKGROUND: The question of intelligent design (ID) has flooded the news this year with the Dover, Penn. trial over the place of ID in public education. With many questions still left unanswered about ID theory, this event will allow the public access to hear from top ID experts and its critics.

Panelists representing ID include Mike Behe, Professor of Biochemistry, Lehigh University and Senior Fellow, Discovery Institute; Paul Nelson, Adjunct Professor, Biola University; Guillermo Gonzales, Assistant Research Professor of Astronomy, Iowa State University; Jonathan Wells, Senior Fellow, Discovery Institute; and Steve Meyer, Director and Senior Fellow of the Center for Science and Culture at the Discovery Institute, Seattle.

Those cross-examining the panelists will include: Antony Flew, noted philosopher; Keith Morrison of Dateline NBC; and faculty from Cal State Fullerton: Bruce H. Weber, Ph.D. Professor of Biochemistry; James R. Hofmann, Ph.D. Professor and Chair, Liberal Studies Department; and Craig M. Nelson, Ph.D. Lecturer, Department of Comparative Religion.

Can material forces, on their own, write out the 20,000 digital DNA files that crowd the "hard drives" of higher animals?

A recent poll indicated that 60 percent of the medical doctors in the US have serious doubts about the veracity of the macroevolutionary theory as taught in universities today.

A new venue is available to give voice to this powerful flow of skeptical thought in the world of medicine, and to promote accurate knowledge and free exchange of ideas concerning the debate over Darwinism and alternative theories of origin. Physicians and Surgeons for Scientific Integrity (PSSI) has been established. PSSI is a means for physicians and surgeons to be counted among those skeptical of nature-driven Darwinian macroevolution. Click the headline above to reach the Web site.

Its members endorse the following statement: "We are skeptical of the claims for the ability of random mutation and natural selection to account for the origination and complexity of life and we therefore dissent from Darwinian macroevolution as a viable theory. This does not imply the endorsement of any alternative theory."

Any person with an M.D., D.O., D.D.S., D.M.D., D.V.M. or equivalent may become a member of PSSI. Membership is free of charge, and agnostics or members of any faith are welcome.

Allowing physicians and surgeons to speak on this subject with a united voice in significant numbers is one of the best ways to help ensure that the scientific facts will be made known, and PSSI can make that happen.

ScienceDaily reports on the amazing way bats catch food.

Aren't random mutation and natural selection incredible in their creative powers?

What happens when a mathematician takes a close look at the just-so stories of Darwinian evolution? The stories quickly change from plausible to ridiculous. Dr David Berlinski likens the cow to whale evolution to the engineering task of converting a car to a submarine. Why are the 50,000+ required morphological changes not found in the fossil record? From the producers of the Icons of Evolution documentary, this video interview is now one of the top five “must watch” videos on origins.

In JCI an article gives "real" scientists a clarion call to action to battle the evil forces of creationism and ID.

Count the numbers of ad hominem attacks, uses of perjorative language, assertions, calls to be close-minded, etc. The fact-value split way of looking at reality comes through loud and clear.

The Wisconsin bill says that only science should be taught in public schools. We suppose that also means that the philosophy of methodological naturalism preached by the materialists of the day should also be thrown out of the biology classroom.

Steve Connor, of the New Zealand Herald, reports that humans are causing evolution to slip into reverse for one of the species of finches that is said to have inspired Charles Darwin after he returned from his famous visit to the Galapagos Islands.

Scientists have found that one of "Darwin's finches" living in the remote Pacific archipelago has begun to lose the distinguishing trait that COULD (emphasis mine) be causing it to split into two different species.

"We need to make more effort to enable those species that are in the process of diversifying to continue to diversify and thereby generate new species," said Professor Andrew Hendry of McGill University in Montreal, who led the study.

If I were a Darwinist, why would I care whether the ground finch "speciated"? It is what we have been saying all along. Finch beaks oscillate about a mean, depending on the changing environment. That's micro-evolution, and non-controversial. They are, and will continue to be, finches.

Time Magazine's Mark Ridley reports on what Judge John Jones was probably seeking in the first place: fame, or perhaps ultimately, infamy.

Roger Dobson, of the Sunday Times, reports on a theory that has traced the origins of laughter back 4 million years to pre-humans slipping and stumbling in their first faltering attempts to walk on two legs.

According to the theory, when they saw a member of their group lose his footing they would laugh as a sign to each other that something was amiss, but nothing too serious.

What won't they think of next...

Don Wise, professor emeritus of geosciences at the University of Massachusetts has his own theory of incompenent design which seems to make as much sense as saying my car is not designed because it overheats in the desert, it runs out of gas, the parts get rusty, and I can't drive it down the sidewalk. Be sure to watch the video at the end of the article and read the lyrics to this favorite Darwinian Hymn.

ScienceDaily reports that for the first time, scientists have documented an organ-specific innate immune system. In research published in the April 18 edition of the journal Immunity, scientists at the University of California, San Diego (UCSD) School of Medicine outline the unique mechanism by which the lung shapes its defensive strategies against microbial invasion.

The alveola possess a complex immune system in which the macrophage is repressed in its steady state, activated when called upon to fight invading microorganisms, and then re-repressed, in a circuit that is unique to this microenvironment.

Lucky...likely not. Intelligently designed...likely so.

Rob Crowther of The Discovery Institute points to a Human Events Online essay by Greg Frankey explaining how liberal organizations like the ACLU and Americans United for Separation of Church and State are working to keep any mention of intelligent design out of public school classes of any subject, let alone science classes.

In arguing so he shows how the teaching of evolution itself is nothing more than dogma, and points to some of the more pressing problems with the whole theory.

The Discovery Institute reports that the Seattle Times Talk of the Times at Town Hall Seattle featured a debate over evolution and intelligent design between CSC Director Stephen Meyer and US paleontologist Peter Ward.

David Postman of the Seattle Times did a fine job as the moderator of the debate.

Both ardent ID supporters and staunch Darwinists agreed that Meyer prevailed. Meyer was more substantive and thoughtful with his answers. Meyer above all successfully showed that there is a debate about evolution and intelligent design and he showed that it is based on science, regardless of political or religious implications.

The AP and then the York Dispatch has picked up on a release by The Discovery Institute. DI is finding some good in the December ruling by a federal judge that intelligent design could not be taught in a the Dover Area School District.

"The ACLU (American Civil Liberties Union) sued to keep a few students in Pennsylvania from hearing about intelligent design, and as a result, they made sure everyone in the world heard about it," said Stephen Meyer, director of the Discovery Institute's Center for Science and Culture, which produces studies and reports about intelligent design.

DI said the lesson in Dover is that the school board hijacked intelligent-design terminology for its attempt to bring religion into school.

WLBT-TV reports that school officials cannot prohibit teachers and students from discussing how life began under a new state law signed by Gov. Haley Barbour.

"No local school board, school superintendent or school principal shall prohibit a public school classroom teacher from discussing and answering questions from individual students on the origin of life," the bill reads.

The new law is not as detailed as the initial version. The Senate had voted to prohibit schools from stifling classroom discussions about the "flaws or problems which may exist in Charles Darwin's Theory of Evolution and the existence of other theories of evolution, including, but not limited to, the Intelligent Design explanation of the origin of life."

Local school officials say they've not had a problem and worry the new law is so vague that court challenges may loom.

Ekklesia reports that UK schools minister, Jacqui Smith, has declared categorically that the government is against the teaching of creationism and so-called "intelligent design" in science lessons in British schools.

She says that "Intelligent Design is sometimes erroneously advanced as a scientific theory but it has no underpinning scientific principles or explanations supporting it and is not accepted by the international scientific community."

We are glad she cleared that up for us. NO scientific principles or explanations. She sounds fairly dogmatic about her opinion.

On the Creation - Evolution Headline Web site the amazing complexity of non-coding DNA is investigated.

A team from IBM found motifs involved in regulation of the genes. These showed a relationship between functional areas of the genes and those not previously considered functional. These structures code for RNA silencers that turn genes off or on in complex ways, even after a gene has been translated.

Click on the link above for more...

Liz Kemmerer, of Science & Theology News, reports on a recently completed one-of-a-kind course taught by a one-of-a-kind professor. In December, Martin Roth, a professor of philosophy of science at the secular private college taught a short philosophy course titled "Intelligent Design" to explore the topic historically and critically.

Roth designed the course to "look at intelligent design on three levels - as an argument for the existence of God, as an alternative to evolution in science, and in the context of the current debate over evolution and religion."

David Postman, of the Seattle Times, reports on the Discovery Institute's reaction to the Dover trial decision.

The only comfort they found in the stinging rebuke was that the ruling would carry no weight beyond Dover.

"Dover is a disaster in a sense, as a public-relations matter," said Bruce Chapman, a former Seattle city councilman and founder of the Discovery Institute, the country's primary supporter of intelligent design.

In the SMU Daily News, Brian Wellman reports on a debate on ID and Darwinism which took place between Raymond Bohlin and Wes Elsberry at the Hughes-Trigg Theater at Southern Methodist University.

In Creation - Evolution Headlines...an article states that the possible length of the Cambrian Explosion could have been 20 million years, and that's a long time for things to "explode" into being.

However, the confidence interval on the radiometric dates at the Cambrian explosion (at around 540 million years) actually "exceeded" the duration of the explosion event! Therefore, any time from 0 to 20 million years would be indistinguishable.

Christianity Today's Rob Moll writes on the views of Answers in Genesis president Ken Ham.

It should be mentioned that many Young Earth Creationists do not agree with Ken Ham's take on IDT, especially those who are active and strong ID proponents.

As reported by Jim Brown in AgagePress, William Dembski, a leading proponent of intelligent design predicts a new course on the subject being offered at Cornell University this summer will attempt to undermine the theory.

Cornell professor Allen MacNeill will be teaching a four-credit course called "Evolution and Design: Is There Purpose in Nature?" "Given that I understand the professor of the class has called me a bald-faced liar - I would guess that [it's] probably not going to be a fair treatment," Dembski offers."

David Klinghoffer, a senior fellow at the Discovery Institute, opines in the Jerusalem Post on Darwinism's effect on Judaism.

Casey Luskin, of the Discovery Institute, responds to Dr. Miller and Judge Jones on their testimony and decisions in the Kitzmiller v. Dover Trial.

Ted Byfield says that the established authorities of every age act consistently. They become vigilantly militant against non-conforming dissidents who challenge their assumptions.

On WorldNetDaily News, he touches on scientists who believe in the supernatural, the recently found missing link, and Darwinists prejudice against scientists who do not hold their view.

A letter received by Byfield came from a research scientist. "I think that the current paradigm of evolution by natural selection acting on random variation will change," he writes. "I think that evidence will accumulate to suggest that much of the genetic variation leading to the evolution of life on earth was not random, but was generated by biochemical processes that exhibit intelligent behavior."

Then he urges me not to disclose his identity. Saying this publicly would threaten his getting tenure, he fears. Galileo (and Frank Beckwith) would understand.

Casey Luskin, of the Discovery Institute, reports on the latest "missing link", which is actually comprised of a few tooth and bone fragments of Au. anamensis, an ape-like species that lived a little over 4 million years ago.

Incredibly, claims of "intermediacy" are based upon 2-3 fragmented canines of "intermediate" size and shape.

Steve Weatherbe, of CanadianChristianity, reports that Canada's Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council (SSHRC) has rejected an anti-ID research proposal from a leading evolution proponent on the grounds it was dogmatic and unscientific.

Dr. Brian Alters, head of the Evolution Education Research Centre at Montreal's prestigious McGill University and an expert witness for the evolutionists at the Pennsylvania trial, said he is incensed by the decision.

"Evolution is not an assumption - it's a fact of science," he told the Canadian Press. "If someone was writing a proposal to investigate how people think about gravity, the researcher would not have to justify gravitation theory in the proposal."

The Darwinists are going to need to drop the above "talking point". Darwinism and gravity don't pass the law of identity. A is not identical to B.

Alters recently received a huge grant from Lucent Technologies Foundation to fight ID.

Clinton Arnold, Professor and Chairman of the Biola University Department of New Testament, responds to the National Geographic Society announcement earlier this month of the discovery of a lost gospel titled, “The Gospel of Judas.” Every major news outlet covered this event with some hailing it as the greatest discovery of the century.

Randy Boswell, of CanWest News Service writes on the growing angst of Darwinists over the emergence of ID worldwide.

Royal Society vice-president David Read states that Britain's national academy of science rejects any approach to the subject that "presents evolution as if it was a theory on a par with intelligent design."

Read said the society issued its statement in a bid to "pre-empt" a North American-style popularizing of intelligent design, particularly among British schools with administrators or benefactors who might bring "ideological or faith-based attitudes" into science classes.

As if no faith, prejudice, or bias exists in the minds of scientific materialists.

Alisha Wyman of the Union Democrat reports on a meeting featuring Phil Johnson, which took place at Columbia College.

Sounding the Trumpet reported that The Intelligent Design Evolution Awareness (IDEA) Club at Cornell is applauding Allen MacNeil, the Ecology and Evolutionary Biology Department, and Cornell University on this summer's new course, BioEE 467, "Evolution and Design - Is There Purpose in Nature?"

KRIS-TV reports that a leading proponent for the intelligent design movement is leaving the Southern Baptist Theological Seminary.

William Dembski had been on the job just one year as the school's director of a new Center for Science and Theology. Dembski announced his resignation this week to become research professor of philosophy at Southwestern Baptist Seminary in Fort Worth, Texas.

ARN released today its Icons of Darwinism T-shirt and accessories.

In his landmark book Icons of Evolution (2000, Regnery Publishing) Dr. Jonathan Wells documented that many of the classic evidences you were taught in your high school biology textbook about neo-Darwinian evolution were wrong. Every iconic image--from the Haeckel’s embryos to the changing colors of moths in industrial England, to the ascent of man--is either inconclusive, incomplete, or even outright fraudulent. Wells commands readers to sharpen their critical thinking and challenge the integrity of scientific thought, while arguing for greater honesty in the continuing, contentious debate over our origins. Wells argues that the most famous case studies for neo-Darwinian evolution no longer convey the spirit or substance of science, but have become instruments of indoctrination--the Icons of Darwinism. These icons deserve to be toppled for the falsehoods that they are.

The graphic on this T-Shirt was design by artist Jody Sjogren who illustrated Well's original book and represents the uncritical devolution to the following icons (from left to right):

1. Homology in Vertebrate Limbs
2. Darwin’s Finches
3. Peppered Moths
4. Haeckel’s Embryos
5. Archaeopteryx: The Missing Link
6. Darwin’s Tree of Life (center)
7. From Ape to Human: The Ultimate Icon (bottom)

See the book Icons of Evolution for a detailed examination of these and other icons and an evaluation of the use of the icons in ten recent biology textbooks. Then ask yourself if the current state-supported teaching of neo-Darwinian evolution is based on scientific fact or uncritical devotion.

McGill University professor, Dr. Brian Alters, has received a three-year Lucent Technologies Foundation grant totaling $650,000 to improve the teaching of science in primary and secondary schools.

Dr. Alters was one of those who testified at the recent Kitzmiller trial in Dover, PA last year, and considers ID to be "pseudo-science" and "a religious belief".

This is a three year project designed to counter the effects of ID in science education.

The journal Nature is making news by publishing a report today that a group of researchers claim to have uncovered the skeleton of a 375-million-year-old fish in the Canadian Arctic that they believe is a missing link in the evolution of some fishes to becoming land walking vertebrates. The fish has been named Tiktaalik roseae, meaning "large shallow water fish."

According to a Discovery Institute Press Release a number of these fishes—Ichthyostega, Elpistostege, Panderichthys—have been hailed in the past as the “missing link.” Maybe one is a missing link; maybe none are. What remains unexplained is the dearth of so-called "missing" links. The Darwinian process, if it indeed produced all of the animal forms around us, should have produced untold millions of transitional forms.

Creation-Evolution Headlines provides a list of newslinks on this find and then analyzes what was actually reported in the scientific article in Nature.

"This recent fossil find poses no threat to intelligent design." So says Discovery Institute senior fellow and leading intelligent design theorist Dr. William Dembski, adding...

"Intelligent design does not so much challenge whether evolution occurred but how it occurred. In particular, it questions whether purposeless material processes - as opposed to intelligence - can create biological complexity and diversity."

In a presentation at the 109th meeting of the Texas Academy of Science March 2-4, a few hundred members rose to their feet and gave a standing ovation to a speech by Dr. Eric Pianka that enthusiastically advocated the elimination of 90 percent of Earth's population by airborne Ebola.

Although published reports claim attempts were made to squelch any recordings of "Dr. Doom's" speech (as Pianka is referred to these days), the Pearcy Report today released a partial transcript of the talk based on an audio recording from the event.

The Seguin Gazette-Enterprise has also release a transcript of a similar speech by Pianka delivered on March 31 at St. Andrew's University.

Three researchers, Jamie Bridgham, Sean Carroll and Joe Thornton claim to have shown how an irreducibly complex system, such as that described by Michael Behe, might have arisen as the result of gene duplication and a few point mutational changes in the latest issue of Science magazine.

“This continues the venerable Darwinian tradition of making grandiose claims based on piddling results,” said biochemist Michael Behe, who developed the theory of irreducible complexity in his best-selling book Darwin’s Black Box.

Read more in this Discovery Institue Press Release and expect to see articles claiming victory for Darwinism in all the major news sources.

For more details you can also read a longer response by Michael Behe "The Lamest Attempt Yet to Answer the Challenge Irreducible Complexity Poses for Darwinian Evolution" and "Stephen Meyer Responds to Research on Irreducible Complexity".

Joe Manzari and Seth Cooper write in the American Enterprise.

As the Dover situation continues to unfold, something seems awry in post-trial events.

Stephanie Simon of the LA Times reports on the trouble biology teachers are having in the Darwinism section around the country. The students are asking tough questions now, instead of quietly sitting and listening with their hands folded.

Ten Questions to ask your Biology Teacher, developed by Jonathan Wells, author of Icons of Evolution, is catching on.

Erin Roach, of The Baptist Press News, offers a follow-up story on Baylor and Dr. Frank Beckwith.

Dr. Beckwith is cautiously optimistic about the appeal for tenure, and is very appreciative of the unsolicited outpouring of support from colleagues around the globe.

World Science reports that at the American Museum of Natural History in New York, five top physicists and astronomers were brought together to debate whether universes beyond our own exist. Those attending then watched as the experts clashed over a question that is nearly unanswerable.

This debate stems from the obvious fine-tunedness of the cosmos and irredicible complexity of life itself. The argument goes, given enough universes, this one was inevitable. This is the materialist's "loophole" to try to keep itself from crumbling, and to keep "the divine foot from entering the door".

Sounding the Trumpet of Cornell University announces that a lecture by Cornelius Hunter, biophysics professor at Biola University and author of Darwin's God: Evolution and the problem of evil and Darwin's Proof: The triumph of religion over science, will take place on Wednesday, April 5, 5:00 PM, in OH 165.

If in the area, be there. An opposing view will be presented.

La Mirada, Calif. — British philosopher Antony Flew, once considered the most prominent defender of atheism in the English-speaking world, will accept the Phillip E. Johnson Award for Liberty and Truth on May 11 from Biola University, a Christian university in Southern California.

Flew, 83, argued in books such as God and Philosophy (1966) and The Presumption of Atheism (1984) that one should presuppose atheism until evidence for God proves otherwise. Then, in 2004, the Oxford-educated philosopher stunned the intellectual world by relinquishing his long-held atheism, claiming that the natural sciences supplied evidence for the existence of a designing intelligence. Flew said that he simply “had to go where the evidence leads.”

The Phillip E. Johnson Award for Liberty and Truth was given to Flew for his lifelong commitment to free and open inquiry and to standing fast against intolerant assaults on freedom of thought and expression. Flew drew scorn from skeptics following his shift in views. When informed that he was this year’s award winner, he remarked, “In light of my work and publications in this area and the criticism I’ve received for changing my position, I appreciate receiving this award.”

Biola University established the Phillip E. Johnson Award for Liberty and Truth in 2004 to honor legal scholar and Berkeley law professor Phillip E. Johnson, who was the award’s first recipient. The award recognizes Johnson’s pivotal role in advancing our understanding of design in the universe by opening up informed dissent to Darwinian and materialistic theories of evolution. Flew is the second recipient of this award, which will be presented on May 11 at Biola University through the university’s Masters of Arts in Science and Religion (MASR) program.

Educated at Oxford following World War II, Flew frequented the weekly meetings of Christian scholar C. S. Lewis’s Socratic Club. Unpersuaded by Lewis’s apologetic and becoming an outspoken defender of atheism, Flew nonetheless advocated the intellectual freedom of scholars of all stripes to challenge reigning orthodoxies and to ask forbidden questions.

Flew received the Oxford University Prize in Philosophy in 1947. He was a lecturer in philosophy at Christ Church, Oxford from 1949 to 1950, followed by four years as a lecturer at the University of Aberdeen, and 20 years as professor of philosophy at the University of Keele. Between 1973 and 1983 he was professor of philosophy at the University of Reading. Upon his retirement he took half-time posts from 1983 to 1985 at York University, Toronto and from 1986 to 1991 at the Social Philosophy and Policy Center at Bowling Green State University in Ohio.

The constant harping is that ID is just a stealth way of Bible-thumping Christians to shove their worldview down people's throats.

The appeal of ID going across many worldview borders, agnostics, Jews, Muslims, etc.

Visit this above Muslim Web site and view some of the very fine videos.

Madaleine Bunting, of the Guardian, comments on how Richard Dawkins may very well be on the way to becoming an embarassment to Darwinism.

We thank you Richard...

Many, including myself, have admired Dr. Beckwith's clear and thoughtful
professional work as a philosopher and scholar since the 1990s. His topics have been varied, and he has written on ID in professional journals and in the popular realm.

What professors and leaders at Baylor University apparently hoped they could keep relatively quiet, now has been exposed. This story has appeared on Web logs and Web sites around the nation and deserves the attention of all. Now, the powers that be at Baylor see that many note this injustice. Let us hope they steer Baylor back on the right course, and eventually to a University of true national prominence.

Those on the outside have an imperfect understanding of all the
circumstances of denial of tenure, but things seem awry at Baylor.

ARN offers the Francis Beckwith book Law, Darwinism, and Public Education. Click HERE for a look.

Those wishing to view an illustrated brochure about the changes to the Kansas Science Standards, please visit the link above.

Art Battson has recently published the first six PodCasts of "War of the Worldviews". Episodes to come will be calling Michael Denton, Phil Johnson and others to take the stand in this 21st Century Scopes Trial.

Be sure to go to the Veritas link at the top where you will find additional podcasts promoting various ARN DVD lectures.

David James, in the Edmond (OK) Sun, speaks up on the ID - Darwinism debate for public schools. A bill in Oklahoma, HB 2107, known as The Academic Freedom Act, has many materialists up in arms.

James makes several good points as to why having a healthy debate in the classroom would be good.

He points out that equivocal evidence can be interpreted either way in biological history.

The title given the opinion is revealing, indicating to many that he is trying to "push" his ideas on others. As if the other side isn't?

Erik Baard, writing for TCSDaily, reports that a prominent research leader is daring an attempt to bridge the gap between belief in God and science with a book about DNA called 'The Language of God'.

"I believe that one can be both a rigorous scientist and a believer in God. Don't get me wrong - science is the only reliable way to draw conclusions about how the natural world works. But God cannot be defined in purely natural terms, or he wouldn't be God," argues Dr. Francis Collins, the director of the National Human Genome Research Institute at the National Institutes of Health.

Traipsing Into Evolution is the first published critique of federal Judge John E. Jones's decision in the Kitzmiller v. Dover case, the foremeost trial to attempt to address the constitutionality of teaching intelligent design.

To read more about the book, click the Discovery Institute link above.

On March 15, mathematician John D. Barrow joined Mother Teresa, Chuck Colson, and Alexander Solzhenitsyn when he was named the winner of this year’s Templeton Prize. The prize is awarded for "progress towards research or discoveries about spiritual realities."

In the Harvard Journal of Law and Public Policy, Kristi L. Bowman writes on the ID - Darwinism controversy and the public schools.

A few school districts are willing to fine-tune previous policies from other districts that have not succeeded, and see how upset materialists get. This report is from the Discovery Institute.

An editorial opinion by Cindi Ross Scoppe, of The State, makes an interesting point.

All the flap in SC about teaching biology; well the standards do not even require Darwinism to be taught.

Read on...

Erin Feese, reporter for the Longmont (CO) Daily Times-Call, writes on a talk we previously announced in ITN. Since the speaker Jamie Nagle, associate professor of physics at the University of Colorado at Boulder, could not get the label "Intelligent Design " correct in the title of the talk (Evolution, Intelligent Design Creationism and Physics), we figured the talk would be unobjective. He did not disappoint.

One talking point that is continuously brought up is that "one of the greatest strengths of scientists is their willingness to change their mind when new evidence comes to light". But, when evidence for intelligent agency is discovered in the biological sciences, the evidence is dismissed and labeled "religious", and when evidence for intelligent agency is discovered in the forensic sciences, it is readily accepted and endorsed. Why?

It appears Dr. Nagle made a bunch of assertions, and concluded, consistent with his scientific materialism, that ID is illegitimate as science. Okay, he is entitled to his opinion.

Critics of intelligent design believe it is a very similar to Biblical Creationism. It’s no wonder they think so, say some of its proponents. Many creationists are making the same mistake.

The Discovery Institute is distancing itself from recent court rulings.

Read the article to learn more about the confusion.

James Madison University is hosting The Madison Cup student debates on Intelligent Design in public education.

Teams will take both sides of the issue: Resolved "That the theory of Intelligent Design (in both its historical and its contemporary versions) has a proper role in America's High School biology courses." With recent court cases quickly setting precidents, this topic is prime ground for citizens' debate.

In his March 14th Breakpoint, Chuck Colson comments on the non-story on the front page of the New York Times.

Whatever you believe about George W. Bush, this Web site is accusing him of scientific terrorism.

You wonder if you could even the begin to have a civil discussion with a "member" of this group on worldview?

The AAAS is continuing their full-frontal assault, pushing the Darwinian worldview in the faces of public school students. It's clear their tactic will be science (fact) v. faith (values/religion).

Be sure to view the video on the above Web site.

Sponsored by the IDEA Club, William Dembski will lecture at UC - Berkeley. On Friday March 17th, there will be a general talk on ID entitled "The Scientific status of ID". Saturday’s talk is entitled "ID as a theory of information".”

Charles Edward White, in Christianity Today, investigates the fine-tunedness of the world in which we live and the sheer impossibility of random mutation to do the job of what we see today in biology.

10^301 (that's 10 to the 301st power) mutations is a number far beyond the capacity of the universe to generate. Even if every particle in the universe mutated at the fastest possible rate and had done so since the Big Bang, there still would not be enough mutations.

This, and many more facts, explains why many intellectually honest astrophysicists, origin of life scientists, and biological scientists have seen the light.

This is a excellent article by Liz Kemmerer, of Science & Theology News.

An an ID course in the philosophy department of secular Knox College has recently concluded.

Martin Roth professor of philosophy of science at Knox taught a short philosophy course titled, “Intelligent Design,” to explore the topic historically and critically at the secular college. This is the first known course solely dedicated to intelligent design. A concentrated course, it debuted during the college winter break from Nov. 29 through Dec. 16 with seven students meeting for three-hour sessions, three times a week for three weeks.

"Anti-Darwinists claim that you're killing God and Pro-Darwinists claim he's already dead," said Micah Riecker, a senior creative writing major from Traverse City, Mich. "It just keeps spinning because people are so uninformed about what is going on." Added Roth: "All of the students are now very much aware that the issue is far more complicated than implied by the media."

Wayne Adams, in the American Chronicle, states that "the Intelligent Design movement is the latest attempt to inject creationist beliefs into the classroom. It is also a concession of sorts."

"Intelligent design proponents have conceded the superiority of the scientific method to faith. They know that an assertion based on scientific research is more credible than an assertion based on faith. So they have endeavored to promote their creationist beliefs as scientific. But the scientific method is a tool for finding answers to phenomena. What they have done is search for phenomena for which we don’t yet know the answers and claim that God did it."

________

Mr. Adams apparently neither knows the Biblical definition of faith, nor what IDT is about.

Faith is the assurance of things hoped for, and the EVIDENCE of things not seen. By faith we UNDERSTAND that the universe what formed at God's command, so that what is seen was not made out of what was visible. Faith is assurance of things unseen by investigating evidences the can be collected by our methods and analyzed by our minds in the here and now.

Blind faith and Christian faith are like oil and water. They are separate and do not mix.

The FACT (science) - VALUE (faith) split which is constantly trumpeted by naturalists is a deception, and needs to be aggressively undermined. Both sides are contending for their worldview, or a comprehensive explanation of the TRUTH of the cosmos we are discovering through scientific or other inquiry.

According to many scientists, the discipline of science is continually seeking naturalistic answers and is seldom, if ever, dogmatic about any conclusions. They do have some degree of Biblical faith that what they are doing will lead them to increased knowledge of phenomena.

Mr. Adams claims that IDT is a "God of the Gaps" theory. This is simply false. IDT looks at things in nature, non-living and living, and through investigations, such as in the fields of scientific forensics, archeology, or SETI, rightly concludes that an intelligent agent caused what the scientists are investigating. Some phenomena shout "agent causation" and IDT is willing to acknowledge this screaming message. Scientism is not.

IDT critics, like Eugenie Scott, encounter a perplexing branch of science, i.e., origin of life, and admit that they don't have the answer right now, but assert that eventually they will discover a naturalistic explanation for the origin of life. Dr. Lawrence Krauss, of Case Western University, states in one of his lectures that "we don't understand the origin of life - big deal." These are the ultimate "cop-outs", and anyone who does not see this, is philosophically and emotionally blinded. Naturalists' assertions amount to the tacit admission that they don’t have the goods, and utterly reject the possibility that there is anything beyond energy, matter, space, and time. Similarly to what Mr. Adams states above, we can say that "what they (naturalists) have done is search for phenomena for which they don’t yet know the answers and claim (assert) that Nature did it." They do this because there philosophy (worldview) gives them this option ONLY. This is known as narrow-mindedness.

Scientism, or reductionism, reduces consciousness, thoughts, reason, or love to complex chemical reactions in a physical thing we call a brain. You cannot scientifically calculate the weight, or measure the length, height and width, or the numerical value of faith, or thoughts, or values, or love that a person possesses, yet these immaterial "things" undeniably exist. How do physical chemical reactions result in immaterial effects? No scientist knows. But scientism boldly asserts that it will eventually figure it out. Trust us.

Mr. Adams is sloppy in his thinking, and does not define the very terms he is writing about. He is doing the two-step, like so many other scientists, and simply regurgitating the ofttimes irrational and false talking points of atheists and agnostics.

Science & Theological News features are article by renown phiolosopher Alvin Plantinga. Judge John Jones gave two arguments for his conclusion that ID is not science. Both are unsound, says Alvin Plantinga.

A letter (co-authored by Dr. Bruce Simat and Walter ReMine) was published March 8 in the Minneapolis Star-Tribune.

It points out the bias of a reporter who interviewed the above mentioned about ID, etc. It was good the Star-Tribune allowed the rebuttal.

Tony Pennington, of the Norman Transcript, reports that a proposed OU congressional resolution to oppose House Bill 2107 failed Tuesday as the University of Oklahoma Student Association Undergraduate Student Congress put down the measure 16-13.

Filed by Rep. Sally Kern (R-Oklahoma City), HB 2107 would allow Oklahoma public school teachers the "affirmative right and freedom to present scientific information pertaining to the full range of scientific views in any curricula or course of learning." The bill also states teachers would not face termination, discrimination or discipline for presenting their views. Students would be evaluated on the information but not "penalized" for agreeing with a "particular position on scientific views." The bill recently passed in the House and is on its way to the state Senate.

OU resolution authors Pouya "Rod" Jahromi, 19, and Kamrin Grissom, 20, oppose Kern's bill and claim it would leave classrooms to the discretion of individual educators and provide for an inconsistent educational experience.

Considering where the talk is taking place, and the title (which includes Intelligent Design Creationism), this will likely be decidedly anti-ID, similar to Lawrence Krauss.

But, it will, perhaps, be a good opportunity to turn the audience's ear and set the record straight on a few things in the question and answer session.

The State reports that the state Board of Education voted to reject a challenge to how evolution is taught in South Carolina high schools.

The state board upheld its previous evolution-only science curriculum for 10th grade biology. Last month, the state's Education Oversight Committee voted to add the phrase "critically analyze" to the evolution guidelines.

So, once again a state has caved to the Darwinism worldview, which is what it is. How long will Darwinists be able to play the religion v. science card, before people wise up, and realize that this debate is worldview v. worldview??? How long will they be able to put their fingers in the dike, before it breaks apart in one final burst??? Education...education...education. When clear thinking prevails, the battle will be won.