The Critic's Resource on AntiEvolution
|Dossiers | Home | Incidents | Literature | Projects | Public BB | Topics|
|Donate | NCSE | PT | TD | TOA | Public BB Archive | PvM's Blog|
There are currently 0 users and 2 guests online.
We live in an exciting age when we can begin to answer one of the most profound questions of the ages. Daniel Bakken
The notion that mutation and selection really aren't blind and undirected is a faith-statement for which they can provide no supporting evidence. Casey Luskin http://www.discovery.org/p/188
Post-Election Special: The Evolutionary Psychologist Knows Why You Vote -- and Shop, and Tip at Restaurants
The most popular naturalist account today is that a non-human past accounts for our minds, attitudes, values, beliefs, and behavior. Denyse O'Leary
"The multiverse idea is baroque, unnatural, untestable and, in the end, dangerous to science and society." David Klinghoffer http://www.discovery.org/p/209
A National Review editorial published today begins as follows. David Klinghoffer http://www.discovery.org/p/209
Well over a year since Darwin's Doubt was published, Darwinists still can't seem to find any better explanation for the Cambrian explosion than oxygen levels. Evolution News & Views
The handicapped and the melancholy are next. Michael Egnor
Progress depends on the young, biologists whose names you’ve not yet heard whispered. David Klinghoffer http://www.discovery.org/p/209
Words lose their meaning. Definitions are blurred. Nothing can really be discussed. Wesley J. Smith http://www.nationalreview.com/human-exceptionalism
The Varieties of "Atheism"; plus on Kindle Now, Here's Our New Book The Unofficial Guide to Cosmos
A lower-case version of the description might be someone like columnist George Will, who identifies as an "amiable, low-voltage atheist." David Klinghoffer http://www.discovery.org/p/209
I assume that if one reader took the trouble to ask about this, then others must be wondering, despite our having addressed the issue many times in the past. Casey Luskin http://www.discovery.org/p/188
Jerry Coyne, who is a professor at the University of Chicago, informs us of a new piece of important scientific research. Michael Egnor
Who, pray tell, could say something so callous that it offends Richard Dawkins? Michael Egnor
What CNN says notwithstanding, I criticized the media, not Brittany Maynard. Wesley J. Smith http://www.nationalreview.com/human-exceptionalism
Don't hold your breath. Erik J. Larson
In his latest book, geneticist Wolf-Ekkehard Lönnig takes on the widespread view that dog breeds prove macroevolution. Evolution News & Views
In a statement to the Pontifical Academy of Sciences, the Pope conceded that evolution, defined as change over time, has happened. Ann Gauger http://www.biologicinstitute.org/people
If the term "denial" applies to either side in this controversy, it is certainly to the Darwinists rather than their critics. David Klinghoffer http://www.discovery.org/p/209
She has moved to Oregon, and plans to commit suicide this Saturday, November 1, under Oregon's physician-assisted suicide law. Michael Egnor
Cosmos blurs the distinction between three meanings of evolution. Are you surprised? Casey Luskin http://www.discovery.org/p/188
Antievolutionists Say the Darndest Things
Antievolutionists often express outrage over alleged incivility from those who oppose their efforts to evade the establishment clause of the First Amendment. But they have no difficulty in dishing out the abuse themselves. Here is a sample from the Invidious Comparisons thread that documents egregious behavior on the part of the religious antievolution advocates.
One thing that Jack Krebs and I agree with is that Pratt can be likened to an outpost under siege in a cultural war.
My wife and I just returned from a trip to Belgium. We visited Bastogne where a few brave Americans of the 101st Airborne Division were surrounded by the German Army during the battle of the bulge. The German attack was led by a crack SS unit that took no prisoners.
What were we fighting against in Bastogne? We were fighting against a Nazi regime that used the philosophy of Naturalism to justify a eugenics program of terrifying proportions. Naturalism is the belief that all phenomena result only from the laws of chemistry and physics and that teleological or design explanations are not valid. Naturalism is not science. It is a belief system.
In the same manner, the defenders in Pratt are fighting against Naturalism, although they may not realize it. Rather than fighting against science, they are actually fighting for science. They are fighting for science that is driven by logic and critical thinking rather than by a philosophy that teaches to the exclusion of all other teachings that we are the products of only chance and necessity. They are fighting for science that is driven by the scientific method rather than science that is driven by a philosophy of Naturalism.
Rather than using logic and good science to support its assault on the brave contingent in Pratt, the KCFS is using tactics one would expect from those that besieged Bastogne: scare tactics, misinformation and no substantive discussion of the real issues.
So, we are back looking at Pratt as the bombs fall. The question is whether the Board and the Community will be supported by the rest of us as they have had the guts that General McAullife and the other brave Americans had that cold winter day in Bastogne 54 years ago. McAullife's reply was very simple when asked to surrender: "Nuts!" McAullife and the 101st were subsequently relieved by elements of Patton's Third Army. In the same way we all need to rise up and put our hands together for the Pratt Board and Pratt Citizens that have just characterized the outrageous censorship by the science establishment as "Nuts!"