Darwinism
Laszlo Bencze: Believed without evidence, Darwinism is metaphysics – but ID is logical
Tales from the quote mine: Leading Darwinists believe, with or without evidence – and why it matters
Nancy Pearcey on Richard Dawkins’ new children’s book
Survival of the fittest: Is there really a battle raging among evolutionists over fitness?
Dear Darwin lobby: The Dover trial is WHY people don’t believe you …
Here’s Jonathan Wells on destroying Darwinism – and responding to attacks on his character and motives
From the indoctrinate u files: Turns out, “teaching creationism” means teaching students to think
And here we thought there was only one completely ridiculous anti-design article out there …
How important are Darwin vs. design issues globally?
When Darwinism infects popular culture, confusion follows as well as nonsense
Darwinism: Is this a big, fat dogfight in the making? Coyne vs. Matzke?
When the Darwin lobby were kids, they were SO poor, they had to …
Alice in Wonderland: We hadn’t heard about the Darwinism part …
He said it: “[t]he universe that we observe has precisely the properties we should expect if there is, at bottom, no design, no purpose, no evil and no good, nothing but pitiless indifference” — professor Richard Dawkins’ cynical manipulation of our moral sensibilities
In recent days, UD contributor Dr V J Torley has rightly taken atheism advocate, professor Richard Dawkins to task for cynical manipulation of our moral sensibilities in his public accusations against Christian philosopher-theologian, Dr William Lane Craig. And that, patently to avoid having to account through a public debate for his many acid fulminations against theism and the Christian faith in particular over the years.
(ADDED, Nov 2/3, NB: it may help to cf. a thought-provoking video here. [NB: This video documents that professor Dawkins is on record that he evidently cannot find a basis for moral objection to infanticide, and that he evidently cannot find a moral basis for objecting to Hitler’s genocide. His projection of moral outrage against Craig etc is therefore credibly manipulative rather than genuine. This is consistent with the long since documented inherent amorality of materialism that is further discussed below.] In case it is needed, this clip documents Dr Craig’s actual view on moral issues, obviously including on genocide. Craig directly responds here, from about 8:15 on, explicitly that the genocide accusation “is a misrepresentation of my position” [8:50], c.9:20 on he clarifies: “dispossess [a debauched culture]” as opposed to “genocide,” though I still think he has not adequately appreciated the evident non-literal war rhetoric context nor does he address the eternal blood feud issue that nearly 1,000 years later Israel faced while in captivity under Persia. Cf comment here below for more. )
Professor Dawkins now seems to have beaten a hasty retreat behind the poisonously polarised cloud stirred up by his knowingly false accusation of support for genocide.
(And if you think that “knowingly false” is inaccurate, you can rest assured that no sane, sensible, informed person in our civilisation can seriously entertain the notion that Bible-believing Christians and Christian leaders in particular, support genocide. The accusation plainly was rhetorical “red meat” tossed out to stir up a distractive, atmosphere-poisoning controversy.)
But that leads to some serious issues. Read More ›