Steno

Are cracks appearing in the Darwinian facade? There appears to be increasing recognition in at least some genomic centres that Darwin needs to be laid quietly to rest as scientific discoveries progress. Professor John Dupre of Egenis for instance writes in the Genomics Network Newsletter – April 2009 – Does Genomics Need Darwin? (p.23) “Whereas until recently it was thought that the vast majority of the genome (>98%) not directly involved in coding for proteins was ‘junk’, perhaps selfish DNA involved in its own project of colonizing the genome, this view is now widely discredited. At least 70% of the genome appears to be transcribed, and it is increasingly suspected that much of this is involved in regulation of genome expression. Especially prominent Read More ›

Ida the Lemur-like creature, has had some high praise from leading Darwinists. David Attenborough announced with confidence that the missing link ‘is no longer missing,’ but the way the evidence has been presented and handled has raised questions about media manipulation, especially from the London Times science correspondent Mark Henderson; he seems quite miffed. 

More on Ida: overblown claims and a worrying precedent

Mark Henderson reports that doubts have arisen now that others have finally been given access to the fossil and suggests that Ida is related to ‘nothing that exists today.’ Although Ida is an important fossil, he writes that ‘she isn’t all that’ and complains that the researchers haven’t provided sufficient evidence to justify their claims. He argues that this is… 

‘…especially serious given the publicity blitz behind Ida…a popular book, a documentary, a website and an exhibition have been launched on the back of this find, before it has received full scientific scrutiny.’  Read More ›

I posted this news item about GM crops on the Science and Values blog and would be interested in starting a discussion about how intelligent design proponents view genetically modified crops. If design in nature is ‘optimal’ then can that be improved through human intervention? What does ID predict, perhaps that GM crops will always be sub-optimal? Read More ›

The Discovery Institute’s Bruce Chapman is reporting that the Templeton Foundation has funded the pro-Darwin conference in Rome. Templeton’s Darwin Conference in Rome 5th March It is interesting to note that in the UK the Templeton Foundation has also funded some very vocal theistic supporters of evolution, including the Faraday Institute headed by Denis Alexander, with $2,000,000 dollars. And the wide ranging Theos / Faraday research project, that wants to ‘rescue Darwin’ by gathering information about the level of acceptance of evolution in UK society, was funded by Templeton. Theos reported back in June 2008 that it is ‘delighted to announce that it has been awarded a major grant by the John Templeton Foundation to undertake a new project on Read More ›

The Theos funded report on attitudes to evolution and creation in UK society has now been published. It gives a confusing picture, although that didn’t stop the Guardian taking one figure out of context to give the spin required by the paper. Guardian news item Theos news item

The report, Faith and Darwin written by Comres not Theos to avoid bias, commented on page 102.

“Despite the decrease of religious practice in the UK and the recent media coverage of issues of science and faith, there is still a core of people who hold to Young Earth Creationism. However, interestingly, the youngest generations and highest educated people show inclinations towards believing in Intelligent Design. Could this be a pointer towards the dominant trend of tomorrow?” Read More ›

Influential Christian preacher Tony Campolo highlights some of the racial assumptions that were part of Darwin’s theory. Writing in Christian Today, ‘What’s wrong with Darwinism?’, 27th February 2009 he draws attention to the full title of Darwin’s first book ‘On the Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection, or the Preservation of Favored Races in the Struggle for Life.’ Campolo though believes that ethics should be the focus of those who reject Darwin’s theory. He further comments (referencing the Descent of Man 1871) that;

“Darwin went so far as to rank races in terms of what he believed was their nearness and likeness to gorillas. He further proposed the extermination of those races which he “scientifically” defined as inferior. To not do so, he claimed, would result in those races, which have much higher birth rates than his designated superior races, exhausting the resources needed for the survival of better people, and eventually dragging down all of civilization” Read More ›

Christopher Booker, writing in last week’s Sunday Telegraph, highlights some of the abuse he received for questioning the validity of Darwin’s theory in an earlier article. Christopher Booker – Why do people think Darwinism is a perfect creation 14/02/09. He writes; “As an old hand at tangling with Darwinists, I was well aware that a howl of furious protests would greet my item last week describing their curious inability to recognise just how much of the story of evolution Darwin’s theory cannot explain.” For point this out he claims he was “…derided as “stupid”, “idiotic” and “scientifically illiterate”. Clearly I was unaware all these riddles had been solved by genetics and the decoding of the human genome.” “…as my colleague Read More ›

A cartoon in an American paper, the New York Post, has brought fresh attention to the race problems in some sections of society. The cartoon shows a chimpanzee shot dead by police with a caption apparently referring to the new American President Obama – (edit: although later denied that Obama was the target).  Note from UD Admin:  As has been pointed out in the comments, the chimp in this cartoon was a pet chimp shot by police in Connecticut.  It was never intended to represent Obama or any other human.  The cartoonist was stunned over the uproar. Where does the idea that human beings are related to apes come from? It comes straight from Darwinism. There is some irony that the left Read More ›

I found this ‘Dawkins – Dick D’ Rap’ on youtube while searching for the piece below – sorry not embedded (and apologies if it has been posted before, but I found it amusing). Dawkins Rap A.A.Gill offers his own review of Attenborough’s programming David Attenborough may just be God – by A.A.Gill Gill comments; “David, honour and blessings be on his name, came down to television to describe for us, once again, why natural selection works and what survival of the fittest really means. He did this by showing a film of himself in previous incarnations. Here was divine proof that life began with Attenborough….It would be nice to see the argument for intelligent design given a separate programme that isn’t Read More ›

Christopher Booker offers his observations on the enthusiasm shown by adherents to Darwin’s theory in the run up to the 200th anniversary of Darwin’s birth. Booker too has noticed the analogy between devotion to Darwin and organised religion. Charles Darwin zealots have made science a substitute religion Booker firstly points out some unresolved problems with Darwin’s theory that are generally ignored or supressed today. He then compares global warming adherents with the Darwinists and comments that “It becomes increasingly obvious that…the Darwinians…are so convinced by the simplicity of their theory that they are unable to recognise how much they do not know – and …their response has been to become ever more fanatically intolerant of anyone who dares question their Read More ›

Andrew Halloway offers his review of David Attenborough’s recent BBC1 prime time documentary ‘Charles Darwin and the Tree of Life’ highlighting the out of date material and poor reasoning. Andrew comments ‘I’m astonished that the BBC still included this [material about the Tree of Life], and what’s more made it the title of the programme, considering that only last month the country’s leading scientific journal, New Scientist, carried a major article called “Why Darwin was wrong about the Tree of Life” (21 January). The article clearly stated that there is “no evidence at all” for the Tree of Life, and this was even backed up by the editorial of the journal, despite the fact that the New Scientist is known Read More ›

According to a Theos report, highlighted in the UK’s Telegraph, “More than half of the public believe that the theory of evolution cannot explain the full complexity of life on Earth, and a “designer” must have lent a hand, the findings suggest.” Rather amusingly, Richard Dawkins thinks it acceptable to insult half the population expressing “dismay at the findings of the ComRes survey, of 2,060 adults, which he claimed were confirmation that much of the population is “pig-ignorant” about science” ‘Pig Ignorant’ over Darwin . Adam Rutherford follows Dawkins into use of insulting language to describe his fellow human beings. Rutherford’s response  – “Another day, another creationism survey. Godly thinktank Theos have conjured yet another set of figures that reveal just how dim Britain Read More ›

David Attenborough has a new series coming out for the Darwin celebrations on BBC 1 in the UK, and has been giving some interviews to the press. Today he claims that creationists have been sending hate mail to him for deny God. “They tell me to burn in hell and good riddance” he complains. Attenborough reveals creationist hate mail for not crediting God 

There is no excuse for Christians to send hate mail to anyone, not least because Attenborough can milk it for all its worth and avoid drawing attention to the real hate campaign against those who reject the orthodox Darwin dogma – such as has been exposed in the Expelled film. Even those who suggest that children’s beliefs should be respected in the classroom find themselves on the sharp end of the Darwinists’ Doctor Martins, such as Michael Reiss who was booted out of his position from the Royal Society for this reason. Read More ›

Steve – I appreciate your work in thinking these issues through, and want to encourage you in your research into intelligent design. As your post was seemingly addressed to me I thought it best to reply with a new thread. Firstly, my concern is to address the possible pitfalls for the design argument that might occur by extending it too far, although I think it possible that some progress can be made in this direction with care. There are historical examples, and the danger is that we might only repeat the errors of previous times if we are not careful. I too have an interest in theodicy and I have discussed theodicy and ethical issues in my book Restoring the Ethics of Creation (my PhD supervisor wrote The Groaning of Creation). Read More ›

Following previous discussion on the influence that Plato’s Timaeus may have had on David Hume and Erasmus Darwin’s work, I thought it would be interesting to compare a well known paragraph of Charles Darwin’s work On the Origin of Species with a passage in the Timaeus. Spot the allusion to ‘forms’ and the phrase ‘most beautiful.’ Having attended a lecture in the Ian Ramsey conference on Design and Nature at Oxford last year, it was pointed out by Stephen Snobelen that Newton had used similar phrases from Plato in his writing such as ‘form’ and ‘most beautiful.’ It is possible that Darwin was referencing Plato through Newton (hence reference to gravity), but also that it stems from Hume and E.Darwin. Leaving aside the question of how Plato ought to be interpreted I would appreciate comments about how people think Charles Darwin used it.  Read More ›