Did anyone happen to notice Time’s cover story for April 2? It seems there is a small movement to teach the Bible in public high schools as literature. Why, you ask would someone attempt to do something so silly? Isn’t this unconstitutional?

” “One can hardly respect the system of education that would leave the student wholly ignorant of the currents of religious thought that move the world society for … which he is being prepared,” Jackson wrote, and warned that putting all references to God off limits would leave public education “in shreds.” ” – Justice Robert Jackson, McCollum v. Board of Education, 1948

” “Nothing we have said here indicates that such study of the Bible or of religion, when presented objectively as part of a secular program of education, may not be effected consistently with the First Amendment…” ” – Justice Tom C. Clark, Abington Township School District v. Schempp, 1963 Read More ›

The real source of the antipathy and vitriol directed toward the ID movement is Fear Of Exposure. The fight against academic freedom is rooted in the worry that Darwinism’s weakness will be revealed… […] The teaching of evolution today in public schools is frozen in the past where it is based largely on a mid-20th century understanding of biology. Research in the biological sciences has moved far beyond that understanding because of the hopeless inability of Darwinian principles to explain the complexity observed in living things. […] There is a revolution under way in the biological sciences. A whole new field of biology called “Systems Biology” has emerged during the past 10 or 15 years. This revolution is just as Read More ›

I had not realized that I had become a fundamentalist until several people wrote to me, wondering what had happened.

(Fell? Hit my head?)

Regular readers of this space (devout thanks to both of you) know that I am still a Catholic, and may wish to read the claim and my response, linked below.

[Update: The problem has been fixed! As a kind poster noted at the PostD, it now reads, correctly, “Roman Catholic” in the online version. Now I won’t spend years putting out fires – plus, I can send all those snakes back to Petco and get a refund before something terminally stupid happens.]
Read More ›

Molecular Mechanisms of Antibacterial Multidrug Resistance Cell Magazine 22 March 2007 Michael N. Alekshun and Stuart B. Levy Schering-Plough Research Institute, 2015 Galloping Hill Road, Kenilworth, NJ 07033, USA Center for Adaptation Genetics and Drug Resistance, Department of Molecular Biology & Microbiology and Department of Medicine, Tufts University School of Medicine, Boston, MA 02111, USA Available online 22 March 2007 My emphasis. Treatment of infections is compromised worldwide by the emergence of bacteria that are resistant to multiple antibiotics. Although classically attributed to chromosomal mutations, resistance is most commonly associated with extrachromosomal elements acquired from other bacteria in the environment. These include different types of mobile DNA segments, such as plasmids, transposons, and integrons. However, intrinsic mechanisms not commonly specified Read More ›

I was nicknamed “Gas.”

Charles Darwin
Autobiography

Is evolution of antibiotic resistance by bacteria an example of Darwinism? Such a claim is very suspicious since Darwinism deals mainly with the origin of species.

Evolution of antibiotic resistance is an example of survival of the fittest within a species, not an origin of species. This phenomenon ought more properly to be credited to the ideas of Edward Blyth rather than Charles “Gas” Darwin.

Loren Eiseley, Professor of Anthropology and the History of Science at the University of Pennsylvania correctly argues:

the leading tenets of Darwin’s work — the struggle for existence, variation, natural selection and sexual selection — are all fully expressed in Blyth’s paper of 1835.

[For more details, read Was Blyth the true scientist and Darwin merely a plagiarist and charlatan?]

Despite this, Panda’s Thumb author Tara Smith continues her usual equivocations about evolution here. If by “evolution”, one means change, then everyone is an evolutionist, even creationists like Blyth.
Read More ›

Barrett Brown and Jon P. Alston, who appear only recently to have entered puberty judging by their obsession with sex, have just published Flock of Dodos: Behind Modern Creationism, Intelligent Design, & The Easter Bunny (Cambridge House Press, 2007). I would like to share with you some quotes. The book is full of stuff like this ,which I trust we can use to advantage: On ID proponents: “This will not be a polite book. Politeness is wasted on the dishonest, who will always take advantage of any well-intended concession, and the leaders of the so-called “Intelligent Design” movement, as we shall see, are so incredibly dishonest that they could cause a veteran heroin addict to blush — not of any Read More ›

Recently, there was a bit of correspondence between moderators of our list about the question of whether aggressive Darwinists can be accused of being like Nazis.

Now, my own view on this subject is as follows: I don’t really care whether Darwinists who routinely launch or justify persecutions against non-materialists are offended. It’s absolutely fine with me if they realize that their actions are closely observed and recorded. Read More ›

I don’t say much around here these days. In fact, I’ll be honest with you; the hard science which resides at the core of the debate over whether or not naturalistic mechanisms could have generated biological novelty or whatever else doesn’t especially interest me, so I pretty much leave it to others. Nor do I make it my mission to duke it out with anyone and everyone who opposes some position I hold with respect to ID. My time is just too precious, and many people won’t change their minds no matter what you tell them. But occasionally I come across statements just too flagrantly moronic to let them slide. Such is the case with this cheap shot a “guest contributor” at The Panda’s Thumb takes at something Dr. Egnor says (Egnor’s statement provided within the quote):
Read More ›

I asked Jonathan Wells to put together the following brief update on evo-devo.

A March 30 press release from the University of Bath quoted evolutionary biologist Ronald A. Jenner as saying: “Since its inception, some workers feel that evo-devo hasn’t quite lived up to its early expectations.”

This is an understatement, since evo-devo has not provided an experimentally confirmed explanation of even a single case of macroevolutionary change. Yet Jenner’s sober assessment contrasts sharply with the extravagant boasting of Darwinist Sean B. Carroll: “Evo Devo reveals that macroevolution is the product of microevolution writ large… We now have a very firm grasp of how development is controlled. We can explain how tool kit proteins shape form, that tool kit genes are shared by all animals, and that differences in form arise from changing the way they are used.” (Endless Forms Most Beautiful: The New Science of Evo Devo, Norton 2005, pp. 291, 295)

Maybe Jenner and Carroll should talk… Read More ›

Government must deal with greenhouse gases: US Supreme Court When the science isn’t convincing then have it declared true by judical fiat. This is the new modus operandi for the science establishment. First Dover and Intelligent Design now the nation and Global Warming. The judiciary is out of control and the science establishment is now a Political Action Committee that relies on government to enforce its findings when the facts won’t support their case. What a fine mess.

A mathematics graduate student in Colombia has noticed the similarity between my second law arguments (“the underlying principle behind the second law is that natural forces do not do macroscopically describable things which are extremely improbable from the microscopic point of view”), and Bill Dembski’s argument (in his classic work “The Design Inference”) that only intelligence can account for things that are “specified” (=macroscopically describable) and “complex” (=extremely improbable). Daniel Andres’ article can be found (in Spanish) here . If you read the footnote in my article A Second Look at the Second Law you will notice that some of the counter-arguments addressed are very similar to those used against Dembski’s “specified complexity.” Every time I write on the topic Read More ›

Ted Davis, a historian of science at Messiah College, used to be part of a list I moderate. He has some good insights into the history of science (especially into the work of Robert Boyle), but he consistently misses the mark concerning ID. Here is a nice synopsis of his view of ID (also with a jab at UD). It is written to Pim van Meurs, as a mentor would write to his disciple. The short of his view is that ID is a reaction to the scientific materialism of Richard Dawkins, which it tries to displace by setting up a new science, which is really just a disguised form of religion. His counsel is to rise above the fray Read More ›

LOOK OVER THE DESCRIPTIONS OF THE FOLLOWING TWO HOUSES AND SEE IF YOU CAN TELL WHICH BELONGS TO AN ENVIRONMENTALIST.

HOUSE # 1:

A 20-room mansion (not including 8 bathrooms) heated by natural gas. Add on a pool (and a pool house) and a separate guest house all heated by gas. In ONE MONTH ALONE this mansion consumes more energy than the average American household in an ENTIRE YEAR. The average bill for electricity and natural gas runs over $2,400.00 per month. In natural gas alone (which last time we checked was a fossil fuel), this property consumes more than 20 times the national average for an American home. This house is not in a northern or Midwestern “snow belt,” either. It’s in the South.

HOUSE # 2:

Designed by an architecture professor at a leading national university, this house incorporates every “green” feature current home construction can provide. The house contains only 4,000 square feet (4 bedrooms) and is nestled on arid high prairie in the American southwest. A central closet in the house holds geothermal heat pumps drawing ground water through pipes sunk 300 feet into the ground. The water (usually 67 degrees F.) heats the house in winter and cools it in summer. The system uses no fossil fuels such as oil or natural gas, and it consumes 25% of the electricity required for a conventional heating/cooling system. Rainwater from the roof is collected and funneled into a 25,000 gallon underground cistern. Wastewater from showers, sinks and toilets goes into underground purifying tanks and then into the cistern. The collected water then irrigates the land surrounding the house. Flowers and shrubs native to the area blend the property into the surrounding rural landscape.

For the surprising answer Read More ›

Commenting on Sam Harris and his facile denunciations of religion, Mike Gene hits the mark: Harris ends with this basic argument: “There is no question that many people do good things in the name of their faith — but there are better reasons to help the poor, feed the hungry and defend the weak than the belief that an Imaginary Friend wants you to do it. Compassion is deeper than religion. As is ecstasy. It is time that we acknowledge that human beings can be profoundly ethical — and even spiritual — without pretending to know things they do not know.” But these are empty words. For example, is Harris (or Dawkins) recognized as someone who displays compassion? He can Read More ›