Scientists know that natural selection can explain the awe-inspiring complexities of organisms, and should be prepared to explain how. But attacking or dismissing intelligent design is likely to aggravate the rift between science and faith that causes students to become interested in intelligent design in the first place.
From a colleague: A 3-member Committee of The Kansas State School Board will conduct hearings in Topeka next week, and possibly the week after, to evaluate proposed changes to the state science standards. Thursday through Saturday next week, May 5-7, the Committee will hear testimony from scientists, philosophers and educators who think the standards should […]
…the very foundation of science in the United States is at risk…
Their simple, idiotic credulity as a populace would have been the envy of Lenin. That is the tragic paradox. The Land of the Free, telly and burgerfed, has become the Land of the Credulous Moron.
One of my favorite over-the-top quotes about the power of natural selection comes from novelist Barbara Kingsolver. According to her, natural selection is Ã¢â‚¬Å“the greatest, simplest, most elegant logical construct ever to dawn across our curiosity about the workings of natural life. It is inarguable, and it explains everything.Ã¢â‚¬Â (Small Wonder, 2002). Another Kingsolver, however, […]
We are not some casual and meaningless product of evolution. Each of us is the result of a thought of God. Each of us is willed, each of us is loved, each of us is necessary.
Although the phrase Ã¢â‚¬Ëœcreation scienceÃ¢â‚¬â„¢ carries disreputable connotations because of its frequent use by some religious fundamentalists, we truly need some Ã¢â‚¬Ëœcreation scienceÃ¢â‚¬â„¢ (in the other sense of that phrase) as a major component of evolutionary theory.
Hubert Yockey attended the 1996 Mere Creation conference at Biola University. At that conference he and I discussed his role in the ID movement. He described himself as an outsider who could do more good for ID by maintaining his intellectual independence and directing his energies at refuting the evolutionary reductionists than by explicitly making […]
“You know, you are going to have to get past those reservations if you want to pursue a career in this field. It just isnÃ¢â‚¬â„¢t possible to succeed in Marine Science if you do not accept the theory of evolution.”
While this subject is in the publicÃ¢â‚¬â„¢s eye, no Wedge member should be able to speak in public without a strong challenge to their claim that Intelligent Design creationism is scientific and not religiously motivated. –S.T.Smith
In a previous post, I remarked that John Paul II “seemed to sign off on conventional evolutionary theory save for the divine infusion of souls at the origin of humanity.” This is not quite accurate. As a friend and colleague who knows the Catholic world much better than I do noted to me by email:
The National Center for Selling Evolution (NCSE) has a widely publicized, in their words, “tongue-in-cheek parody of a long-standing creationist tradition of amassing lists of Ã¢â‚¬Ëœscientists who doubt evolution’ or Ã¢â‚¬Ëœscientists who dissent from Darwinism’.” They call it “Project Steve.” (Go here for a description of the project and here for the list; go here […]
Prediction: Bush and Benedict XVI will do to evolution what Reagan and John Paul II did to communism
I started blogging end of March 2005, beginning at www.idthefuture.com and now with my blog, Uncommon Descent (I intend to do a lot of cross-posting). Since I’d like Uncommon Descent to provide a complete record of my blogging activity, I include here my prior posts at IDthefuture that have thus far not been cited here:
It’s always amazed me that people are so willing to abandon the hard work and intuition that leads to intelligence, upon which rests the entire edifice of science, and resort to little more than gambling in an attempt to create innovation. I have another word for it–laziness.