In the News

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.