Governor Sarah Palin Vexes Matt Damon
Posted by teleologist | Filed under Atheism, Darwinism, Intelligent Design, Theology, blog specific issues, politics
What is worse than a darwinian atheist? A bubblehead darwinian atheist.
This Hollywoodpecker must have received too many knocks on his head. Read the rest of this entry »
Tags: atheist, hollywood, Matt Damon, Sarah Palin
Atheist Darwinian Bigot
Posted by teleologist | Filed under Atheism, Darwinism
I know I am being redundant with the post title.
Darwinian Mahmoud Ahmadinejad Syndrome
Posted by teleologist | Filed under Darwinism, Education
The Darwinian Mahmoud Ahmadinejad syndrome.
Roger DeHart and a particularly egregious example of Darwinian persecution that occurred in 2000 and 2001 in Burlington, Washington. DeHart, then a veteran Washington state High School biology teacher, tried to supplement his biology textbook with articles critical of Haeckel’s embryos and peppered moths from mainstream science publications, such as The American Biology Teacher, Natural History, The Scientist, and Nature. You can guess what happened next. The American Civil Liberties Union issued veiled threats of legal action, and the National Center for Science Education, a pro-Darwin lobby group, insisted that DeHart teach only the evidence that allegedly supports Darwinism. Bowing to the intimidation, the superintendent of DeHart’s school district prohibited him from distributing the articles– or even talking about them. DeHart was subsequently removed from his biology teaching position, replaced by a junior faculty member with a degree in physical education.
Poor PZ! He tried. He “really, honestly tried!”
Posted by DonaldM | Filed under Biology, Darwinism, Humor, entertainment
The (in)famous PZ Myers, well-known ID critic and staunch Darwinist and philosophical naturalist, is at it again. He has written a “review” of The Spiritual Brain: A Neuroscientist’s Case for the Existence of the Soul by Mario Beauregard and Denyse O’Leary. PZ starts off in a huff:
I tried. I really, honestly, sincerely tried. I’ve been struggling with this book, The Spiritual Brain: A Neuroscientist’s Case for the Existence of the Soul, by Mario Beauregard and Denyse O’Leary, for the past week and a half, and I’ve finally decided it’s not worth the effort. It’s just about completely unreadable.
Poor fellow. It must have been a real effort for him to try to comprehend the book. Read the rest of this entry »
Pixie’s Misrepresents Behe on Common Descent
Posted by teleologist | Filed under Atheism, Dstortions
This post is created to hold the OT comments from Methodological Naturalism: Is it Necessary for Science?
Its All About the Evidence…Evidently!
Posted by DonaldM | Filed under Atheism, Intelligent Design, Philosophy, Theology
In many discussions across the blogoshere about the existence of God or supernatural entities, the claim is often made that there’s no reason to think that such things exist because there simply is “no evidence”. Those who do think such entities exist are either “delusional” a la Richard Dawkins, or holding such beliefs “without evidence”. In either case, the theist has somehow failed in his or her epistemic duties to retain such beliefs, especially in our modern, scientific world.
But what precisely is the problem? Is it really a case of “no evidence”, meaning that no observation or phenomenon has ever or could ever provide evidence for the existence of God?
If that is what is meant, it would seem to be reasonable to ask for evidence that such a claim is true. But what that evidence would even look like isn’t at all clear. Or maybe what is meant is that there may be some observations that could be seen by some as evidence for the existence of God, but that there are no known principles that can connect that evidence to the conclusion. In its stronger forms, it is added that no one has ever or will ever know of such principles. What evidence there is for such a claim isn’t clear either. Read the rest of this entry »
Methodological Naturalism: Is it Necessary for Science?
Posted by DonaldM | Filed under Atheism, Darwinism, Intelligent Design, Philosophy
I’ve recently had the “privilege” of discussing some of the implications of so-called methodological naturalism (MN) on one or two blogs. For Darwinists, especially Darwinists who take philosophical naturalism (PN) as true, MN is an absolute necessity for scientific practice.
Thus MN becomes an extension of PN, and has the effect of making science a correlate of PN. Now, many defenders of MN would argue that isn’t the case at all and that MN is quite separate from PN and in no way implies its truth or even demands that PN be followed. But is that possible? Given what MN says and how it operates within science, is there a principled way to distinguish between it and full-blown PN?
I don’t think there is. Read the rest of this entry »
My retreat from the public view….
Posted by scordova | Filed under blog specific issues
In case you all haven’t heard:
My retreat from the public view….
God bless everyone!
New Movie Exposes Darwinist Assaults on Academic Freedom
Posted by fdocc | Filed under Darwinism
Premise media has just announced the release of Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed, a new film on the intelligent design controversy starring Ben Stein, due out this February.
Expelled takes a fresh look at the debate as Ben Stein interviews the prominent scientists and academics on both sides of the issue, including ardent Darwinists Richard Dawkins, PZ Myers, and Eugenie Scott, and design proponents such as Stephen Meyer, Jonathan Wells, and Guillermo Gonzalez.
Cutting through the rhetoric, the movie gets to the meat of the story — what is happening to scientists and professors who support intelligent design, and, perhaps more disturbingly, why is it happening?
According to the film’s press release, Expelled is
“a disturbing new documentary that will shock anyone who thinks all scientists are free to follow the evidence wherever it may lead.”
Ben Stein, a pop-culture icon who is also a lawyer, an economist, a former presidential speechwriter, author and social commentator,
“uncovers a long line of biologists, astronomers, chemists and philosophers who have had their reputations destroyed and their careers ruined by a scientific establishment that allows absolutely no dissent from Charles Darwin’s theory of random mutation and natural selection.”
Any film willing to ask these questions will spark controversy and turn up the heat on the entrenched Darwinian establishment. Expelled takes a look at several recent assaults on the academic freedom of pro-intelligent design scientists, including Drs. Richard Sternberg, Carolyn Crocker, Guillermo Gonzalez, and (unfortunately) many, many more. By exposing their stories to a national audience, Expelled reveals the stark truth: Darwinists have been conspiring to keep design out of classrooms, out of journals, and out of public discourse.
Read Bruce Chapman’s comments about the film at Evolution News & Views.
Visit the film’s website here.
Prominent Darwinist commits suicide
Posted by scordova | Filed under Atheism
Clark Adams was on the board of directors of Internet Infidels, the organization that hosts the infamous “swamp” (the infidels creation/evolution discussion board).
It was the swamp creatures the heroic ID proponents and creationists have fought on the internet in various places for many years, and these battle continue to this day…
But now, one of the Darwinsits generals in the person of Clark Adams falls on his owns sword in the middle of battle!
At first I was about to seriously gloat that yet another Darwinist was vanquished. He killed himself in a manner thoroughly consistent with his pointless Darwinian world view. But alas, I find the passing of this particular enemy to be an unhappy event…
Read the rest of this entry »
Young Cosmos Weblog Operational!
Posted by scordova | Filed under Darwinism
A pro-ID YEC weblog has been launched!
Visit:
Hector Avalos faces his match on the internet
Posted by scordova | Filed under Humor
Avalos is the Darwinist villain at ISU who tries to emulate Nero. He persecutes honorable Christian professors like scientist Guillermo Gonzalez. It turns out, Bill Dembski may have caught Hector telling a fib. Too early to tell, but see the continuing drama : here.
I have a video however of the fate of Hector. Hector fought Achilles. Achilles was the guy who snuck inside the Trojan Horse. Now, ya know, I’m just gonna have to root for the guy who snuck inside the Trojan Horse!
Atheist Bigots Abound
Posted by teleologist | Filed under Atheism, Darwinism, Intelligent Design
While not every Darwinist is an atheist, just about every atheist is a Darwinist. So don’t tell me that there is no connection between ID, Darwinism and Atheism.
Thank you to EN&V for bringing this bigotry to our attention and another demonstration of atheist morality.
Chronicle of Higher Education Unearths New Evidence in Support of Gonzalez, But Tries to Discount It
Iowa State’s Spokesman Tells Another Whopper about University’s Tenure Standards
U.S. Senator Expresses Alarm Over Denial of Tenure to Gonzalez at Iowa State
Key Developments in Gonzalez Tenure Denial Case, May 14-19
Darwinists Spread Misinformation about Guillermo Gonzalez’s Denial of Tenure
ISU Faculty Admit ID Played Role in Gonzalez Tenure Denial
Intellectually Fulfilled Theism
Posted by derudo | Filed under Atheism, Darwinism, Intelligent Design, Theology
Isn’t it interesting that 19th century (the great “death of God” era) Darwinian “science” made it possible for Dawkins to become an intellectually fulfilled atheist, but that late 20th century science has made faith and theism more rational and reasonable than ever before in human history (in my opinion)? It’s an interesting turn of events. The “science” in which Dawkins put his atheistic faith turned out to be bogus.
It turns out that the universe did not always exist, and that it began in a flash of light (high-frequency gamma rays, but that’s electromagnetic radiation, just like light, only much more highly energetic). And who would have expected in Darwin’s time that life was not fundamentally based on chemistry, physics, and probability, but on information, information processing, and nano-technology super-machines?
Paul had it all figured out 2,000 years ago when he pointed out in the book of Romans that we are without excuse to disbelieve, because God has made Himself evident in things that are made (i.e., designed), and these things are all around us, especially us, who are fearfully and wonderfully made.
What Darwinism cannot do for us
Posted by scordova | Filed under Darwinism
It has been presumed by the critics of ID that religious beliefs like Christianity are sustained primarily through socializing mechanisms.
Perhaps they believe that through alternative socializing mechanisms religion can be destroyed. Consider the petttion Dawkins signed to label Christianity as child abuse.
However, there is reason to think such anti-religion measures would not succeed because some people’s religion was not originated from socializing mechanisms.
Consider the near death experience and conversion of George Foreman. He was an impoverished teenage criminal that eventually reformed into the multi-millionaire minister of the Gospel he is today [reportedly signed a 137 million contract among other mutli-million dollar contracts].
See the abbreviated version of Foreman’s story: George Foreman beyond.. part4
Foreman is an example of what “the God Delusion” can do for someone’s life. “The God Delusion” can reform a formerly impoverished criminal and make him an upstanding and wealthy member of society.
From an operational perspective, it seems counter productive to industry to suppress certain forms of “the God delusion”.
In contrast, societies predicated on destroying the God delusion have been abysmal failures (can we say Stalin and Mao and Hitler). Darwinism is only useful for puppy beaters, and Foreman’s life is an example of what Darwinism cannot do for us.
PS
For interested readers, I strongly encourage watching the entire story:
Darwin’s Victim
Posted by scordova | Filed under Darwinism, Humor
I beat a puppy, I believe, simply from enjoying the sense of power.
Charles “Gas” Darwin
Jack Krebs gets 2007 Darwin Award
Posted by scordova | Filed under Darwinism
I’m pleased to announce that Jack Krebs, President of KCFS (Kansas Center For Sewage, a Darwinist organization for indoctrinating public school children into Darwinism) and author at PandasThumb is the recipient of the 2007 Darwin Awards conferred by the NCSE.
Featured above is Krebs with Darwin Chic Liz Craig.
I’d like to congratulate Jack on this honor.
Noticed the award has a picture of Charles “Gas” Darwin at the top. It looks really splendid.
Congratulations, Jack!
I was nicknamed “Gas.”
Charles Darwin
Autobiography
Lee Spetner’s Not by Chance
Posted by scordova | Filed under Darwinism
Since Atom at Uncommon Descent was so interested in Spetner’s work, I open this thread to discuss Lee Spetner’s book, Not by Chance. Spetner is Johns Hopkins biophysicist. He received an endorsement from Nobel Laureate Christian Anfinsen for his book.
Salvador
VaTech Killer expresses admiration for Columbine Darwinists
Posted by scordova | Filed under Darwinism
From Va. Tech awarding degrees to victims
[Cho] refers to “martyrs like Eric and Dylan” — a reference to the teenage killers in the Columbine High School massacre on April 20, 1999.
ID, Darwinism, and Divine/Fallen Human Uniqueness
Posted by derudo | Filed under Atheism, Darwinism, Intelligent Design, Theology
Dear Teleological Folks,
I posted the following over at UncommonDescent.com but it is undoubtedly long lost in the comments. I thought it might be of interest here. As some of you may know, I used to be a militant, Dawkins-style atheist. All that changed in 1994 after I bought my five-year-old daughter a cartoon video entitled The Lion, The Witch and The Wardrobe. Everything went downhill from there as I apostatized from my former religion of atheism. 
(Yes, it is a religion!)
***
The gap between humans and all other forms of life on the planet — in so many categories that one would have to write many books on the subject — is so profound that it represents the ultimate discontinuity in nature, which is characterized not by seamlessness, but by discontinuities. This is the antithesis of Darwinian philosophy.
As a former atheist, I would suggest that the great divide is not between Catholics and Protestants, but between materialists and those who recognize the uniqueness of humankind (this includes our great capacity for good, and our great capacity for evil). It is only by recognizing our divine origin — which seems increasingly difficult to deny, in my view — that we have any hope of cultivating the good and suppressing the evil. But this requires brutal self-honesty, which is antithetical to the fallen part of our nature referenced above.
These are ultimate issues, and are ultimately the only ones that really matter, because they affect and reflect upon all areas of our lives, which is why the (ID/Darwinism) debate is so heated.
