In the News

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.