Evolution: A Word We Can All Love

According to Neo-Darwinism, once the first lusty cell leapt onto the stage of the world, purely impersonal, material processes reigned–a blind watchmaker and less than blind. It was a mindless mechanism. This is quite different from the teleological evolution that some, including the Catholic Church, have considered a possibility. Darwininian evolution possesses no

Darwinism: Weeding out the Weak

World magazine has a brief essay and interview with historian Richard Weikart on how Germany moved from Darwin to Hitler. The essay begins, “Phillip Johnson, leader of the Intelligent Design movement, writes, “The philosophy that fueled German militarism and Hitlerism is taught as fact in every American public school, with no disagreement allowed.” The interview concludes with Weikart noting that “Darwinist terminology and concepts are prominent in many of Hitler’s writings and speeches.” In the example Weikart gives, Hitler is explaining the danger of saving and caring for the weak and imperfect: The natural struggle for existence, which only allows the strongest and healthiest to survive, will be replaced by the obvious desire to save at any cost even the Read More ›

Agronomists Poll Leads to Surprising Result

Update: Craig Roberts, Editor-in-Chief of Crop Science Society of America, pointed out that the poll noted below was posted for the normal, two-week period of time before giving way to the next two-week Quick Question. The ASA should be commended for leaving the poll up for the full period, and for all of its members who support free scientific inquiry into the question of origins. The post has been updated to incorporate Roberts’ information. As William Dembski notes here, there’s a new fad among professional societies–denouncing intelligent design. Perhaps somebody wanted the American Society of Agronomy to join the new fad; but agronomists, apparently, don’t herd very well. The society conducted an online poll regarding the teaching of alternatives to Read More ›