In the News

Michael Balter, who writes for Science magazine, wrote an opinion in International Herald Tribune.

He argues that the challenges to Darwinism should be included in the science classroom. He cites some research that suggests that when students were exposed to alternatives to Darwinism, a majority changed their minds, and moved in the Darwinist worldview.

More...

Evolution News & Views reports on Forthekids, a blogger who writes regularly at Reasonable Kansans. The blogger has been keeping things interesting since August of last year, holding the Kansas media accountable and getting to the truth of the matter, especially in regards to the debate over intelligent design. Recently, she had a great post.

More...

NCSE reports that a resolution was introduced by Representative Robin Hamilton (D-District 92) on January 26, 2007, in the Montana House of Representatives. Referring to the Committee on Education, it would, if enacted, express the Montana legislature's recognition of the importance of separation of church and state and support of the right of local school board trustees to adopt a science curriculum based on sound scientific principles.

More...

Interesting abstract in PNAS regarding Darwin's Tree of Life hypothesis.

Although the authors are no ID proponents, they say that a TOL hypothesis is imposed on the data, and those who advocate the TOL need to give up the quixotic search.

More...

Here is a column by Babu G. Ranganathan in The Conservative Voice.

He raises some great points that all ID proponents should commit to memory before engaging the other side.

More...

Christina Kauffman, of the York Dispatch, reports on the Pulitzer Prize-winner journalist and best-selling author Edward Humes' book about the Dover intelligent design trial, which was released to most major booksellers recently.

Humes interviewed several of the trial's key players for the nonfiction book, which classifies the events in Dover as a representation of the larger national conflict over what people believe about human origins.

Humes is no great friend to ID, saying, "People doubt or outright reject the theory of evolution but they don't even know what it is they've rejected. They just know they don't like it. Ultimately, the fallout for such thinking could be a national crisis; fewer young Americans are getting science degrees, and that doesn't bode well for the United States' progress against foreign competitors."

More...

Check out a brief and cogent post on the Dilbert Blog.

Steve appeals for a big bang which was front-loaded with "intelligence" which would strongly suggest that it was caused by an intelligent entity.

When we look back on the problem of the infinite regression of cause and effect, we eventually get to the point of a necessary, eternal entity; it may be either "God", or eternally existing matter, because you cannot have matter, energy, space and time pop out of absolutely nothing.

A great example of clear thinking is in Evolution News & Views by Logan Gage.

What's wrong with the title of this post?

Gage says "This is one of the most patronizing lines in the debate over Darwinism and public schools. Call me simple, but if something isn’t based in fact, why isn't it wrong?"

In our relativist society, something can be subjectively "right" for an individual, but not based on facts. How do you rationally and reasonably talk to people like that? You attempt to appeal to their rational intuition. There really is a Truth out there that corresponds with reality. A True Truth.

The press release below will likely spark a big fight over the issue of Kansas' institutionalization of materialism.

January 30, 2007

NEWS RELEASE:
John Calvert, 913-268-0852

KANSANS FIGHT AGAINST STATE MATERIALISM

The debate about evolution actually hinges on a deeper issue - materialism, also known as naturalism.

Materialism and naturalism are philosophies that claim that natural phenomena, including humans, derive simply from the interactions of matter, energy and the physical forces - by material or natural causes. Materialists reject any creative force or cause.

Many Kansans are concerned that proposed changes to Kansas Science Standards will cause Kansas Public Education to indoctrinate young children in Materialism, the philosophy that dominates Russian culture. This teaching model permits only material or natural causes to explain where we come from. It systematically excludes legitimate scientific controversies about materialistic theories of the origin of life (chemical evolution) and the origin of large scale changes in bio-diversity (macro-evolution).

Kansans are voicing their concerns in a variety of ways. A petition urging the Board to reject the materialistic proposals is circulating throughout Kansas. Over 2500 signatures were delivered to the State Board at its meeting on Jan 9. Yesterday the team that proposed the objective teaching model in the current standards posted the petition on their web site. This will allow people from all over the state to voice their concerns electronically.

http://www.KansasScience2005.com/petition.html

Kansans are concerned because Materialism is the origins story that is the foundation for a variety of non-theistic religions and religious beliefs. Atheism and Humanism depend on a purposeless self-existing universe with life being the product of unguided evolutionary change.

In response to the Petition one Board member has asked the Board’s legal counsel whether it is appropriate for State Schools to promote materialism and to systematically exclude scientific information relevant to evolution that is critical of the theory.

"We believe the State should be scrupulously objective when it engages children in a discussion of the origin of life," Said Bill Harris, PhD, a research biochemist. Dr. Harris led the Team of scientists and educators who proposed the current model for teaching evolution.

"The current objective standards were scientifically and educationally validated by extensive hearings in May 2005," said Greg Lassey, a biology teacher who helped with the project.

A new movie about the hearings and the testimony of the 23 experts will be shown at the Glenwood theater on January 12, 2007 in Kansas City: Kansas Science Hearings: Exposing the Evolution Controversy.

For information about "Materialism" go to this Web site and click on "What is Materialism? Click here and find out!"

For information about the proposal that will import materialism into the standards, click on the first item on the top left of the side bar for that Web page which is titled: "Proposed Changes which Substitute Materialism for Objective Origins Science." The provisions that mandate materialism are in red. The provisions being systematically excluded by the red are in blue.

The problem is not with evolution as a theory, it is with a construct that does not tolerate any critical analysis of it. That construct is called Methodological Naturalism or Scientific Materialism. It is actually worse than a philosophy because, its tenets can’t be questioned. They must be accepted. It converts evolution into a religious dogma.