NPR: “National Propaganda Report”?

The new journalistic standard that politically incorrect views do not need to be represented, let alone reported fairly, was on full display on today’s NPR Morning Edition coverage of a teachers convention in California where a class was taught on how to teach evolution. Reporter Gloria Hillard did a fine job of hyping what was, in fact, a small gathering and allowing evolutionist Prof. Ken Miller plenty of time to define the issue of intelligent design.If you want to know the opposition view, go to the Answers in Genesis creationist website for further information on the topic, he suggested. Wasn’t that nice of him? There was no attempt whatever to have a contrary point of view heard. Usually NPR at Read More ›

Catholics, Evangelicals Defend Intelligent Design

Dr. George Coyne, the University of Arizona astronomer and Jesuit priest who is also head of the Vatican Observatory has been speaking to whatever Darwinist group will have him on the topic of why intelligent design “belittles God” and should be opposed by Catholics, who, indeed, should welcome Darwin’s theory in all its glory. Coyne has infinite Christian charity and patience for Darwinists who diss God, but none at all for his co-religionists who doubt Darwin. A news article last week in the National Catholic Register that merely reported Coyne’s provocative views sparked a spate of letters this week (April 30-May 6 issue–not yet available online) rebuking Dr. Coyne for misrepresenting ID (among other things he called it “a fundamentalist Read More ›

Chapman’s Take: A Great Night for Intelligent Design

Last night’s debate before 800 at Town Hall in Seattle was a notable success for Dr. Stephen Meyer, Discovery Institute and the case for intelligent design. The Seattle Times co-sponsored the “Talk of the Times” event with Town Hall and their respective representatives seemed surprised by the large public response. Like some of the local Darwinists with whom I and other Discovery staff spoke afterwards, they probably were surprised also by the outcome. Call it a technical knockout. David Postman of The Seattle Times, Dr. Stephen C. Meyer and Dr. Peter Ward Several University of Washington professors came to provide moral support to Dr. Peter Ward, the well-known UW astrobiologist, but they may have wondered why he had agreed to Read More ›

Fair Fight Over Darwinism and Design in North Carolina

When the controversy over Darwinism and intelligent design is debated on university campuses, the deck is usually stacked heavily against proponents of intelligent design. North Carolina State University has shown, however, that the topic can be debated with the fairness and civility that ought to characterize academic discussions. On Thursday, April 20, before a crowd of some 200 people, a biologist and philosopher defended intelligent design, and a biologist and philosopher defended Darwinism. That debate continued Thursday night at N.C. State University before a crowd of almost 200 people. Sponsored by the NCSU and Wake chapters of the American Civil Liberties Union, the debate featured four speakers — one scientist and one philosopher from both sides of the issue. The Read More ›

Now That Science Magazine Recognizes That Behe’s Theory of Irreducible Complexity Is Science Will They Let Him Respond

The contention that biochemist Michael Behe’s intelligent design argument of “irreducible complexity” (IC) is not science was undercut in a recent issue of Science magazine which contains a paper purporting to falsify the theory. If it’s not science, why bother to try to falsify it? Further, the hapless case made against Behe’s theory — as Dr. Behe explains in his detailed response — shows that irreducible complexity is also good science. Unintentionally, this paper in Science puts the lie to the whole line used in the Dover trial against Behe and his theory of irreducible complexity. It will be interesting to see whether Science lets Behe reply to the Thornton paper in its pages.If you can’t find it in Science, Read More ›