Aug 042005

Macroevolutionary Darwinism is a bad speculation that has been presented as such so many times, for example in the book by David C. Stove “Darwinian Fairytales” (free download):

As well as David C. Stove’s related article “So You Think You Are a Darwinian?

Now that public schools will be presenting scientific criticisms to Darwin’s theory in Ohio, Minnesota, New Mexico, and probably in Kansas and others, I want to have this thread as a place where students can search for related material, mostly as online books and articles.

See some highlights and links to the official document “Critical Analysis of Evolution“:

However, as bad as bad speculations are, also are bad those bad interpretations of the Bible, no matter how generalized those private interpretations may be in our society. Continue reading »

 Posted by at 1:45 pm
Aug 012005

Krauze on Telic Thoughts has a nice collection of the responses to New Scientist. I disagree with Krauze on one of the response which said, “To dismiss arguments for ID merely because they have been hijacked by creationists is like dismissing Darwinism because social Darwinism lead to the holocaust.” This is a redherring. ID critics know this is not true as I’ve pointed out in Atheism’s Trojan Horse vs. Creationism’s Trojan Horse.

Why is this tactic important to the Darwinists? Maybe it is because they know that the general public is skeptical of Darwinian evolution, but they are even more skeptical of injecting any religious belief on someone else and on science. If they are successful in branding Intelligent Design as a Christian belief then they would have successfully kill any public support for ID. This is a good tactic because it had worked before with YEC. Why bother dealing with the merits of ID and science when you can mislead the public by hiding the truth.

Aug 012005

Dembski points out an article by Charles Krauthammer on ID, here.

I like Krauthammer’s political commentaries, if he would have only ended it there. By allying himself with the Darwinians against ID only shows that when his god is being attacked he must join the jihad.

In his article he makes no scientific challenges to ID and after all science is the reason for his criticism of ID, isn’t it? He fails to show even a cursory understanding of ID when he asked “on what scientific evidence?” . If he has even a cursory understanding of ID he would have known on what evidence. Has he not read any of Behe’s book, paper and articles? Has he not read any of Wells’s, Meyer’s, or Dembski’s books and papers? Has he not look at any of the number of internet websites that debate these topics? Is this just sloppy journalism or willful ignorance?

His analogy between the current ID vs. Darwinian debate with Fabricius vs. Kepler is even more puzzling. Continue reading »

Aug 012005

Here is an example of the fantasy mindset of NASA. In this Tim Russert interview with 3 crew members on Discovery, consider their baseless assertions.

MR. RUSSERT: The question for all of you: planet Earth, in the Milky Way galaxy–Milky Way just one of 100 billion galaxies–do any of you have any doubt that there’s intelligent life beyond Earth?

DR. THOMAS: Well, Tim, you’re quite right, the universe is a vast ocean and we are barely wetting out feet in the beach of that ocean. There are huge distances out there. The immensity is almost unimaginable. Given that, I would say it’s highly likely that there is life somewhere out there in some form, probably a form that’s not even recognizable to us.

DR. CAMARDA: I would say probably odds are there is intelligent life out there.

COL. COLLINS: I also do believe that. I think it would be–it’s kind of unimaginable that, you know, we would really be alone in this universe. I think that, you know, probably not our generation but future generations of people on Earth will find intelligent life.

Let’s carefully analyze their answers for a moment. First, what is the basis for their confidence in the existence of ET life? The universe is a big. It is really big. It’s kind of unimaginable that we are alone in the universe. Do these sound like educated and scientific conclusions? No they sound more like a religious belief and wishful thinking. Continue reading »