Tag: Darwinists
ACLU Says Louisiana Science Education Bill on Evolution and Other Issues Is Fine As Written
After all of the harrumphing by Darwinists that the Louisiana Science Education Act (LSEA) promotes “creationism” and is therefore unconstitutional, the director of the Louisiana ACLU has now conceded that the bill is actually fine as written according to a Louisiana TV station: ACLU Executive Director Marjorie Esman said that if the Act is utilized as written, it should be fine…. Of course, Ms. Esman goes on to fret that some people might misuse the bill, and in that case the ACLU might sue. Well, I have news for Ms. Esman: Any law can be disregarded, and so yes, if a teacher wants to willfully ignore what the Louisiana Science Education Act says and try to endorse religion, the teacher Read More ›
Michael Behe Gets What He Deserves: a Fair Treatment of His Argument
This week Behe’s Edge of Evolution received a glowing review in The Philadelphia Inquirer by Cameron Wybrow, who writes: Behe’s new book, The Edge of Evolution, provides some hard numbers, coupled with an ingenious argument. The key to determining the exact powers of Darwinian evolution, says Behe, lies with fast-reproducing microbes. Some, such as malaria, HIV, and E. coli, reproduce so quickly that within a few decades, or at most a few millennia, they generate as many mutations as a larger, slower-breeding animal would in millions of years. By observing how far these creatures have evolved in recent times, we can estimate the creative limits of random mutation. It’s worth noting that, unlike certain critics who used their reviews to Read More ›
A Prediction for Artificial Life
Materialists predict they will create “artificial life” in a test tube in the next 3 to 10 years. I have a counter-prediction: They will succeed only by re-defining “artificial” and “life.” For example, “artificial” will cover any human manipulation of an existing organism — so replacing a few genes or enzymes in an already-living cell will count as creating “artificial life.” And “life” will be anything that can undergo “Darwinian evolution” — such as an artificially engineered system of molecules — even though it can be sustained only in a carefully controlled laboratory environment. But a free-living cell? I don’t think so. We are still many years and many discoveries away from understanding the nature of life even in prokaryotes. Read More ›
Cardinal Sees Red Over Media Misstatement
Cardinal Christoph Schönborn of Austria discomfited Darwinists last July when he published an article in the New York Times taking them to task for claims the Church backs Darwin’s theory of evolution. Now on his website, his staff points out that some in “the English-speaking press” misreported a lecture two weeks ago in Vienna’s St. Stephen’s Cathedral as “somehow drawing back from his essay in the New York Times.” Annotation: It has come to our attention that the content of Cardinal Schönborn‘s first catechesis has been mis-reported in the English-speaking press as somehow drawing back from his essay in The New York Times. This is inaccurate, as will be apparent from the full text. In order to clear up this Read More ›
Nightline polls Darwinists and finds (surprise!) there IS no scientific debate over Darwinism
Nightline ran a story on intellingent design last night, and if the inane preview article is any indication, the segment was the sort of lopsided hatchet-job one used to expect from the folks at “60 Minutes”—but not nearly as intelligent. Nightline’s main point appears to be that there really isn’t any scientific controversy over Darwinism and intelligent design. How do they know this? They checked with several Darwinists, who told them so! That’s right. According to Nightline, because Darwinists happen to believe there is no scientific controversy over evolution, there really must be no controversy. Hmm. Nightline could apply this logic to a lot of other issues besides intelligent design: