Atheism

Or should I say pin-up girl of the anti-creationists? Yes, she posed nude and had her fellow femminist/atheist anti-creationist Skepchicks pose nude as well for a pin-up calendar to raise money for their anti-creationist cause: From Wiki: In 2006, Watson released The Skepchick Calendar, a pin-up calendar featuring pictures of skeptical women for every month. Proceeds provided the attendance fee for several female applicants to attend the James Randi Educational Foundation’s The Amazing Meeting. New calendars have been made in subsequent years, Ironically, this is the same Rebecca Watson who complains that atheist men sexualize women (supposing that atheist men would behave more rationally toward women than religious men). She was the center of ELEVATORGATE where she was “invited for Read More ›

. . . and begin to dig in further. This is, of course, not exactly the first time that UD contributors and commenters have had to take note of the unfortunately strong tendency of evolutionary materialism advocates to resort to atmosphere-poisoning tactics instead of dealing with the issues posed by design thinkers  on the merits. Now, atheistical objectors are of course quick to say “how dare you suggest that atheists are immoral.” (Actually — to head off a notorious distractive strawman tactic talking point, the real issue is that secular humanist evolutionary materialISM, a worldview, has in it no foundational IS that can bear the weight of OUGHT, which from Plato on has been noted as opening the door to Read More ›

I have just now commented in the recent thread on Dr Fuller’s thought, and think it useful to headline for record (especially given some continued abusive misbehaviour at Anti- Evo and linked sites that has come to my attention in recent days): ____________ >> Let me clip a few thought-sparker cites from Dr Steve Fuller: “The failure of intelligent design theory to specify the intelligent designer constitutes both a rhetorical and an epistemological disadvantage…The epistemological disadvantage is subtler, namely, that intelligent design theory is unnecessarily forced to adopt an instrumentalist philosophy of science, whereby its theory is treated merely as a device for explaining particular phenomena (i.e. as products of intelligent design) without allowing inferences to the best explanation (i.e. Read More ›

On May 16, UD News reported on the Ben Carson speech at Emory, raising some significant issues on the tendency of some Darwinists to toss ad hominem rhetorical stink-bombs at those who question the ethical implications of their views. (And yes, I am pointing to the unanswered problem that evolutionary materialism, ever since at least the days of Plato in The Laws Bk X, has never been able to objectively ground OUGHT in a worldview foundational IS that they accept.  And in light of what Hume pointed out with his guillotine argument, if such an objective basis for ought does not lie in the foundation of the worldview, it can never be brought in thereafter. Since we cannot have turtles Read More ›

For some time now, one of the ID Foundations series, has been on the UD “most popular” list. I had occasion to visit it just now, to see why. I found a statement by a Mr Peter Griffin regarding an exchange with the pseudonymous anti design theory web personality known as Zachriel, and find myself compelled to reply to the issue of violation of confidence and willful poisoning and polarisation of issues by embroiling attacks to the person. In particular, I must note how this post plainly reflects a violation of confidence of correspondence in the teeth of an explicit act of protest regarding earlier violation of confidence. It seems that Zachriel thought he could get away with such violation Read More ›

As Dr Torley recently highlighted here at UD, Mr Dan Savage, an activist for homosexuality, recently tried to trash Bible-based Christian ethics (at a conference on bullying) by accusing the Bible of advocating slavery. (We need not elaborate on his publicly displayed ignorance on issues linked to the general, historic, NT-based Christian view on the ceremonial law in the Pentateuch, and his conflation of topics under that head with, say, relevant issues in sexual ethics and principles of core morality. Let’s just say that on ethics, I highly recommend Dr Torley’s discussion here.) When several dozen high school students walked away in protest at the tone and substance of his diatribe, he then proceeded to mock them. Oopsie! In response Read More ›