In the News

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.