Go here for the full pdf: https://uncommondescent.com/documentation/Judge_Jones_Peer_Rev_Reb.pdf. Go here for the full pdf: https://uncommondescent.com/documentation/Judge_Jones_Peer_Rev_Reb.pdf.

Since 1999, Kansas has now swung four times on the question of science standards and whether evolutionary theory should be properly scrutinized or swallowed whole. Below is the latest. This war will not be decided by courts, legislators, or school boards, but by young people as they wake up to the fact that dogmatic Darwinists have been systematically indoctrinating and disenfranchising them. Just as the counterculture of the 60s overturned the status quo, so a new counterculture, with high school, college, and university students taking the lead, will overturn the Darwinian status quo.

Evolution Opponents Lose in Kansas Primary
By John Hanna
Associated Press
posted: 02 August 2006
09:56 am ET

TOPEKA, Kan. (AP) — Conservative Republicans who pushed anti-evolution standards back into Kansas schools last year have lost control of the state Board of Education once again.   Read More ›

Here is an email I received from a troll just after I started posting Jim Downard’s asinine emails to me. Presumably the troll wanted me to post the email as is. I am posting it, but without incriminating a prominent anti-ID proponent, whose career I was supposed to place in jeopardy, but which would have backfired on me. Note that I emailed “Concerned Scientist” twice (never a reply):

Email 1 (7.12.06): “I’m not sure what to believe. In this age of computers and hard drives it makes no sense to me that you didn’t keep a back-up of your project. Absent that, you need to reconstruct it and show it to me before we can take a next step. –WmAD”

Email 2 (7.14.06): “Unless I hear back from you in short order with some solid evidence that the story you gave below is true (e.g., transcript with “F” for course from [snip–prominent anti-ID proponent], I’m going to conclude that you are a troll and will use your letter any way I see fit. –WmAD”

Date: Tue, 11 Jul 2006 12:32:06 -0700 (PDT)
From: Concerned Scientist < concernedscientist23@yahoo.com>
Subject: Supression of an ID Experiment
To: [snip]@designinference.com

Dr. Dembski,

I recently graduated from the University of [snip],
with a major in computer science and a minor
in economics.  I originally planned to minor in
biology, and it is the disgraceful events that led me
to change this that I wish to share with you.  The
events I describe here took place between the early
fall of 2004 and fall of 2005, however I had feared
repercussions from the University if I had stepped
forward.  I have now graduated and been accepted into
a graduate program in another state, so I have come up
with the courage to speak. Read More ›

From the Lockheed Martin newsletter at http://www.lockheedmartin.com/data/assets/10051.pdf:    

More student activism to unmask evolutionary pretensions:  MYSPACE: http://www.myspace.com/evolutionquestions XANGA: http://www.xanga.com/evolutionquestions LIVEJOURNAL: http://evoquestions.livejournal.com BLOGSPOT: http://www.evolutionquestions.blogspot.com

With all the talk about Jerry Coyne lately, I just had to dig up this oldie but goodie from Phil Johnson.  I think we should feel sorry for Jerry Coyne. His own work has contributed to the destruction of Darwinism, and he seems to be suffering from a condition I call metaphysical panic, resulting from the shaking of a worldview he had always assumed to be unchallengeable. Persons suffering from metaphysical panic tend to lash out in impotent rage while making wildly illogical arguments. I encounter this sad condition regularly. MORE  

This article (http://www.the-scientist.com/article/daily/23793) presents the ongoing controversy over whether an evolutionist presented “adequate justification for the assumption in the proposal that the theory of evolution, and not intelligent design theory, was correct” . . .  in his grant proposal!

I’ve reported on this blog Coyne’s NewRepublic review of Coulter (go here) and Hotz’s LATimes review of Quammen, Brockman, an Shermer (go here). There’s an interesting contradiction between the two reviews. See if you can catch it. Compare Jerry Coyne’s insistence that  The real reason Coulter goes after evolution is not because it’s wrong, but because she doesn’t like it–it doesn’t accord with how she thinks the world should be. That’s because she feels, along with many Americans, that “Darwin’s theory overturned every aspect of Biblical morality.” What’s so sad–not so much for Coulter as for Americans as a whole–is that this idea is simply wrong. Darwinism, after all, is just a body of thought about the origin and change of Read More ›

[From a colleague in the UK:] The current issue of the British Ecological Society Bulletin has a special feature on Gaia. It appears that James Lovelock was made an Honorary Member of the B.E.S. in 2005, and the Gaia hypothesis is his “most significant contribution to ecology”. Apparently, the Gaia hypothesis posits that the earth’s ecosystem has improbable stability, and this is increasingly being accepted as a fact by ecologists. In particular it points to processes like these: animals secrete nitrogenous waste as urea rather than nitrogen to help other species use the waste product; phytoplankton in the oceans secrete dimethysulphide, a costly gas which is important for cloud formation; the balance of photosynthesis releasing oxygen and taking in carbon Read More ›