ID proponents are quick to argue ‘viewpoint discrimination’ whenever their attempts to introduce their scientifically vacuous ideas fail. If ID were really interested in protecting people from viewpoint discrimination then surely they will be outraged by the following article Can God Love Darwin, Too?
Remember RIchard Colling, a biologist and professor at Olivet Nazarene University in Illinois. In 2004, Colling wrote a book called “Random Designer”.
… as he said in a letter to students and colleagues this year—“I want you to know the truth that God is bigger, far more profound and vastly more creative than you may have known.” Moreover, he said, God “cares enough about creation to harness even the forces of [Darwinian] randomness.”
Continue reading “Viewpoint discrimination - Where are the ID proponents now?”
After posting Yet Another Creationist Meltdown last July, I began to mull over testing a little hypothesis, namely that right-wing idealogues caught up in embarrassing political or sexual scandals have a better likelihood of being Creationists.
Well, we have a new Data Point. It turns out that Senator Larry Craig, R-Idaho, has been up to more than just allegedly soliciting men in adjacent bathroom stalls.
Courtesy of Jim Fisher’s January 9, 2006 article in the Lewiston Morning Tribune (original here, registration required):
Then there’s U.S. Sen. Larry Craig, who as a House member 16 years ago co-sponsored a constitutional amendment, the “Community Life Amendment,” to authorize teaching “the creation of the earth as accepted in Judeo-Christian tradition.”
And indeed, right there in the 101st Congress, 1989, there is (then Representative) Larry Craig co-sponsoring House Joint Resolution 297:
Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States relating to the right of the people to allow voluntary prayer and the teaching of the Judeo-Christian ethic in public schools….
SECTION 2. For the purpose of section 1, the term ‘teaching of the Judeo-Christian ethic’ shall include the Ten Commandments and the creation of the earth as accepted in Judeo-Christian tradition.
Last April, I received this nice letter from Mark Mathis.
Hello Mr. Myers,
My name is Mark Mathis. I am a Producer for Rampant Films. We are currently in production of the documentary film, "Crossroads: The Intersection of Science and Religion."
At your convenience I would like to discuss our project with you and to see if we might be able to schedule an interview with you for the film. The interview would take no more than 90 minutes total, including set up and break down of our equipment.
We are interested in asking you a number of questions about the disconnect/controversy that exists in America between Evolution, Creationism and the Intelligent Design movement.
Please let me know what time would be convenient for me to reach you at your office. Also, could you please let me know if you charge a fee for interviews and if so, what that fee would be for 90 minutes of your time.
I look forward to speaking with you soon.
4414 Woodman Ave. #203
Sherman Oaks, CA 91423
Continue reading “I'm gonna be a ☆ MOVIE STAR ☆”
It’s not even about the lawsuits and charges of corporate theft that have cropped up between Creation Ministries International (formerly known as Answers in Genesis (AiG)-Australia) and its former partner, AiG-USA, under Ken Ham, nor is it about the on-line porn star who played the role of Adam in a movie made for AiG’s new Creation Supposeum.
No, this new scandal involves Kevin Jackson, whose term as Mayor of Rio Rancho, New Mexico ended prematurely when he was forced to resign over a slew of allegations of financial misconduct.
So, how is Rio Rancho’s ex-mayor involved with creationism? More below the fold.
Continue reading “Yet Another Creationist Meltdown”
It looks like somebody either never heard of Dover, or refused to learn from their lesson. It seems the local ID supporters of Chesterfield County aren’t happy:
So far, the official actions of the CCSB have been limited to issuing a rather vague and confusing statement. ID proponents had hoped to influence the selection of science textbooks, but they started their campaign too late, and the CCSB approved the selection of standard biology texts. But there is still much concern about the situation in Chesterfield. ID supporters, backed by a local conservative group called the Family Foundation, are energetic and well-organized, as evidenced by their ability to deliver a petition with more than 1,100 people who questioned the use of “evolution-only” science texts.
Energetic and well-organized supporters of pseudoscience… sounds like a one-way ticket to another budget-busting, unwinnable multimillion dollar lawsuit. Virginia, you can do better than these guys.
The Alliance for Science has the full story. If you are a Virginia resident and want to get involved, please contact them. Also, visit the link to learn much more about the story, and also about Shawn Smith’s blog that tracks the Intelligent Design Creationism movement in Chesterfield County. Let’s keep sound science in Virginia science classes and get the jump on things before they can stir up trouble.
Crossposted at Neurotopia
The Alliance for Science, a wonderful group of which I am a member, has a link about a survey that examines public perception of the new Creation Museum. Having recently visited the Propoganda Ministry Museum myself, I was very underwhelmed. I will report my experiences there in a future post replete with pictures over at Neurotopia. I feel bad because I haven’t been keeping up on the evolution/science activism side of my life for a very long time now, aside from this post and pushing the Alliance for Science’s Evolution Essay Contest, I have done very little this year to even address the issue. Might have something to do with my dad dying and whatnot, I’m not sure.
The interesting part of the survey is that “white evangelicals” or “fundamentalists” weren’t particularly approving of the intellectual travesty Museum either. Maybe there is hope for America after all. Or, maybe the “Museum” really is such a shoddy, transparent attempt at evangelizing that nobody is fooled.
Do stop by and check it out.
Quick, before I start the post proper, guess how many beneficial mutations separate us from the last common ancestor of humans and chimpanzees. Write your guess on a bit of paper, then read on.
Over at Uncommon Descent, Dave Scott opines
“Coyne and his chance worshipping peers are stuck between a rock and a hard place. The rock is gradualism and the hard place is Haldane’s Dilemma (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haldane’s_dilemma) . As gradualism gets more gradual Haldane’s Dilemma gets more difficult to overcome – there’s a limit to the number of mutations that can become fixed. As gradualism gets less gradual then the improbability of simultaneous beneficial mutations becomes more difficult to overcome. A truly classic example of being stuck between a rock and a hard place!”
The “simultaneous beneficial mutations” argument is a relatively new (or at least rejigged) argument that is dealt with elsewhere (see also here). However, Haldane’s dilemma has been a favoured argument in anti-evolution circles for a long time. Unfortunately for the anti-evolutionists, Haldane’s dilemma has never been a barrier to evolution, despite their misrepresentations. Recent work from the Human, Chimpanzee and Macaque genome projects underlines the fact that Haldane’s dilemma does not prevent evolution, and it is worthwhile revisiting one of the core anti-evolution arguments relating to it in the light of these results.
Continue reading “Haldane's non-dilemma”
The Answers in Genesis world, that is. That is the impression you clearly get from the 40-page Briese Report posted on the Briese Committee website of Creation Ministries International, formerly known as AiG-Australia, until (according to the Briese Report) a number of amazing/suspicious/incredible events occurred that basically amounted to Ken Ham’s AiG-USA taking over the name, copyrighted content, and mailing lists of AiG Australia. The report makes you realize some things about modern creationism: (1) It’s a big business and the money comes from the subscribers to publications and the speaking tours to fundamentalist churches; (2) thus, economic competition between groups for limited resource of audiences and subscribers is very real; and (3) Ken Ham knows these facts very well, and according to the Briese Report he has twisted a lot of arms to make sure AiG-USA stays on top. I have not been able to find a response from AiG-USA, if anyone finds something please post it.
Ever want some good ole fashioned southern California creationism? Well the Jesse Nickles, an international studies major at UC Irvine, has your answer: Evolution Doesn’t Make Much Sense. With arguments like these he will be running the Discovery Institute in no time.
Females: Although debatable, humans are the only species in which the females are more physically attractive than the males—the sole exception being, perhaps, Stephen Colbert….
Time: According to the theory of evolution, it took millions of years for mankind to figure out how to cultivate, hunt, invent the wheel, etc., and yet, in the last few hundred years alone, we’ve discovered the steam engine, the car, electricity, the computer and the safety pin? You’ve got to be kidding me.
And don’t miss the surprise ending.
Posted by Nick Matzke on May 31, 2007 | Comments (1000)
The previous thread, “Is Creationism Child’s Play?“, was closed by an admin because it was getting so long that it was loading slowly or not at all. A contributing factor is that PT has apparently been experiencing some kind of denial-of-service attack which is also slowing things down.
I have been out of town and not able to contribute to the thread much, or even read all of it, but apparently it has evolved from mudslinging into a reasonable dialog with a young-earth creationist, Mark Hausam, who actually wants to discuss the issues. Mark has pretty much acknowledged that his belief is based on a literal, inerrant interpretation of the Bible, and that he is willing to invoke miraculous “appearance of age” arguments to explain away physical evidence that conflicts with his interpretation of the Bible. Usually this sort of person is about six months away from complete deconversion from creationism. With the appearance-of-age argument, they have already admitted that the physical evidence on its face is totally against them, and that they have admitted that Last Thursdayism is as well-supported as young-earth creationism (Last Tuesdayism, of course, is unspeakable heresy). Once they’ve gone this far, most people can’t maintain the necessary doublethink for very long (Paul Nelson, John Mark Reynolds, Kurt Wise, and Marcus Ross are about the only exceptions, and they each have the peculiar ability to remorsely drown their scientific conscience whenever reality intrudes upon their textual interpretation).
This sort of discussion should be encouraged so I am starting a new thread for those who wish to discuss the issues. I will be watching the thread to ensure that it remains courteous.