In a recent debate between Stephen Meyer and Karl Giberson, Giberson (a well-known theistic evolutionist) related what he thought was how ID could proceed in order for him to take it more seriously as a scientific endeavor. I thought it was a very thoughtful response, and posted it here for you.
Read More ›
As claimed here, he says: The simulation is really quite bad. According to the article, they used 12 billion pixels in a cube 350 million ly across, for a resolution of 153000 ly per pixel (without adaptive meshing). Now our galaxy is about 100,000 ly across, so we basically have one largish galaxy per pixel. With 100 billion galaxies in the universe, then at a minimum we would need to have 100 billion pixels to simulate for our “universe simulation” if we used “adaptive meshing” to skip over the vacuum in between, so right away you can tell we have only about 10% of the necessary computer resolution. But they didn’t even come close to that. According to the article Read More ›
Unsatisfied and unconvinced by what he was being taught about evolution at Marmara University in Istanbul, Turkey, 21-year old student Enes Kayan knew there was another side which was never presented in his courses. So in 2012, Enes, a member of the Marmara Young Vision Student Club, decided to organize a symposium in which he and other Marmara students could hear alternative views on evolution, including intelligent design. The idea that evidence against Darwinism, and even for intelligent design, could be freely presented at a university angered some students and professors, and about 300 of them staged a protest, which Enes said actually worked to his advantage as it brought publicity to the event, which was held on May 16-17, Read More ›
Re new statement of faith: wo tenured Bryan College professors that were notified their employment will be terminated on May 17 after they failed to acknowledge the college’s recent “clarification” on the origins of man in their contract renewal are suing the college in Rhea County Chancery Court. The lawsuit, which was filed on Monday, states that when the Bryan College Board of Trustees approved a “clarification” to the school’s statement of faith saying that man descended from Adam and Eve and did not evolve from other species, it was effectively altering the Bryan College statement of faith. The school’s charter expressly forbids an alteration to the college’s statement of faith. Developing.
Hey: A 96-page internal New York Times report, sent to top executives last month by a committee led by the publisher’s son and obtained by BuzzFeed, paints a dark picture of a newsroom struggling more dramatically than is immediately visible to adjust to the digital world, a newsroom that is hampered primarily by its own storied culture. More. Not a solution. But one less pile of rubble.
Within the last few days, this story has come out. I’ll provide a link below; but, for the Darwinists (I won’t call them evolutionary biologists. Why? Because Erasmus Darwin was an evolutionary biologist. Lamarck was an evolutionary biologist, etc. No, they’re followers of C. Darwin, and, hence, Darwinists) who want to maintain that Richard Sternberg and others were not shabbily treated, here it is, the same kind of treatment, and, again, at the hands of ‘dispassionate, objective’ scientists. Here’s an excerpt from the article in the Daily Mail: A globally-renowned climate scientist has been forced to step down from a think-tank after he was subjected to ‘Mc-Carthy’-style pressure from scientists around the world. Professor Lennart Bengtsson, 79, a leading academic Read More ›
In my previous post I discussed Joel Velasco’s claim, in his recent debate with Paul Nelson, that biological designs fall into a nested hierarchy. Velasco is by no means alone in making this bizarre claim. It is not controversial that it is not true, yet evolutionists routinely insist that, as Richard Dawkins once put it, genes across a range of species fall into a “perfect hierarchy, a perfect family tree.” If, like many, your first question is “what are they thinking?” then go to the [1:33:21] mark in the Nelson-Velasco debate where for the final few minutes of his response segment, Velasco sheds light on the closing of the evolutionary mind. Read more