If Collins stands for “theistic evolution,” reading about it has made some of us feel better about atheistic evolution. At least the atheistic evolutionists don’t pretend that they think human beings have intrinsic value. You know where you are with them.
It’s good that First Things is sponsoring an honest and civil debate.
John G. West: The disclosures about the experiments followed Collins’s repeal earlier this year of restrictions on the use of aborted fetal tissue in NIH-funded research… researchers also sliced off skin from the scalp of the aborted babies and then grafted the fetal skin onto the mice. In the words of the scientists: “Full-thickness human fetal skin was processed via removal of excess fat tissues attached to the subcutaneous layer of the skin, then engrafted over the rib cage, where the mouse skin was previously excised.” The body parts used for these experiments were harvested from aborted human fetuses with a gestational age of 18-20 weeks. By that age, an unborn baby has brain waves and a beating heart. He can hear sounds and move his limbs and eyes …
We will print, at Uncommon Descent, whatever Dr. Swamidass wishes to say further on this interesting topic of disappearing articles. We’d also be happy to hear him address how he thinks Dr. Axe has misrepresented him. Hey, we’re listening.
ID has the benefit of being able to argue for design by comparing to objects we know for certain were intelligently designed. Evolution does not have this advantage.
I have posted the second video in my two part book recommendation series on the YouTube channel. In the previous video I highlighted many books that argue for intelligent design. My view is that proponents of design should face the strongest criticisms possible, and not be afraid of doing so. In line with this philosophy, Read More…
The point of view Dr. Rope Kojonen (philosopher/theologian) and Dr. Zachary Ardern represent was, we are told, pioneered by Asa Gray (1810–1888, pictured), father of American botany. Gray is remembered now only as a foil for Darwin (as portrayed in the Britannica entry here). But he deserves to be remembered and have his views represented fairly in his own right.
Pultz: They find support in writings from the Biologos organization but also, weirdly enough, turn to atheist Stefaan Blancke and his paper “Irreducible incoherence and Intelligent Design: a look into the conceptual toolbox of a pseudoscience”. I guess the old saying that “the enemy of my enemy is my friend” can be applied to this bizarre situation where young adherents to theistic evolution join ranks with atheists to prevent other young Christians from being drawn to ID.
Pultz: They agree that God designed life, but if you are able to see evidence for design in nature, you are wrong.
Strandness: Richard Dawkins famously said that Charles Darwin made it possible for him to be an intellectually fulfilled atheist, but I found that ID made it possible for me to be an intellectually fulfilled Christian.
He was always very much their sort of guy; one wonders what took them so long. It seems as though Templeton is returning to an earlier approach here. Collins is definitely a God Squad type, having held the right positions. There was a middle period when some of their awards gave pause for thought
If you liked the raw feed from the debate, you’ll love this cleaned-up version.
Here’s vid from the Ratio Christi Facebook page of Joshua Swamidass vs. Michael Behe. at the LIVE Veritas Forum 2020: God and/or Evolution.
In the real world, this is not the time to be buying into “consensus” but to be advocating reform.
Are these claims really being made to help the theology or to help theistic evolution?