Navigation
Disclaimer
Authors are solely responsible for the content of their articles on PandasThumb.org. Linked material is the responsibility of the party who created it. Commenters are responsible for the content of comments. The opinions expressed in articles, linked materials, and comments are not necessarily those of PandasThumb.org. See our full disclaimer.
Recent Comments
- Ed Darrell on November 14, 2004 04:35 PM
- Steve on November 13, 2004 12:50 AM
- John Jones on November 12, 2004 11:28 PM
- Wesley R. Elsberry on November 12, 2004 04:40 PM
- Bill Gascoyne on November 12, 2004 01:24 PM
- Salvador T. Cordova on November 12, 2004 10:23 AM
Recent Trackbacks
Recommend this entry to a friend
Posted by Timothy Sandefur on November 12, 2004 10:00 AM
Incidentally, while writing the last post, I stumbled upon the McLean v. Arkansas Documentation Project, a pretty cool resource with lots of material on the case.
Trackback URL: http://www.pandasthumb.org/cgi-bin/mt/mt-tb.cgi/611
Comment #10217
Posted by Bill Gascoyne on November 12, 2004 01:24 PM (e) (s)
I get an error from that link.
Comment #10225
Posted by Wesley R. Elsberry on November 12, 2004 04:40 PM (e) (s)
The canonical URL for the McLean Documentation Project is
http://antievolution.org/projects/mclean/new_site/index.htm…
Wesley
Comment #10233
Posted by John Jones on November 12, 2004 11:28 PM (e) (s)
Fantastic resource. Langdon Gilkey, a theologian testifying for the plaintiffs (i.e. one of the good guys), was a prof of mine in college and spoke often about that case. I believe he’s since retired and is now Emeritus at UVA. He also wrote a book on the trial, “Creationism on Trial.” Terrific discussion of the differences between scientific and religious inquiry.
Comment #10238
Posted by Steve on November 13, 2004 12:50 AM (e) (s)
I’ve heard philosophers criticise Ruse, but I’ve never heard any Gilkey criticism.
Comment #10292
Posted by Ed Darrell on November 14, 2004 04:35 PM (e) (s)
Mr. Cordova said:
Morowitz’s insights into creationist misuse of the 2nd law of Thermodynamics is right on the mark.
However, it is interesting Morowitz is now accpeting grants from the Templeton Foundation.
Why is that interesting? The Templeton Foundation is interesting in rapprochement. They do not have a religious agenda which supports creationism.
The foundation’s website says:
The mission of the John Templeton Foundation is to pursue new insights at the boundary between theology and science through a rigorous, open-minded and empirically focused methodology, drawing together talented representatives from a wide spectrum of fields of expertise.

Comment #10208
Posted by Salvador T. Cordova on November 12, 2004 10:23 AM (e) (s)
Hi Timothy,
That was an excellent website. One of the witnesses against the creationist side was Dr. Harold Morowitz who is now a professor at my school, George Mason University.
Morowitz’s insights into creationist misuse of the 2nd law of Thermodynamics is right on the mark.
However, it is interesting Morowitz is now accpeting grants from the Templeton Foundation.
See :
http://www.arn.org/ubb/ultimatebb.php?ubb=get_topic;f=14;t=0…