Intelligent Design

Discussing the concepts surrounding intelligent design, its use in various scientific fields, debating faulty logic, discovering the humor of human thinking.

Friday, November 16, 2007

Darwin challenged, research censored

More evidence concerning the objectivity of Darwinian scientists.

"Here's what's going on: Somebody within the scientific community let [Baylor dean Ben] Kelley know that Marks was running a website that was friendly to intelligent design. Such a thing is completely unacceptable in today's university system – even at a Christian institution. Kelley was probably told to have the site shut down immediately or suffer the consequences," Ruloff said.

"What are those consequences? The ultimate penalty is to have Baylor marginalized by being designated as not a 'legitimate institution of higher learning.' So designated merely for the 'crime' of allowing Neo-Darwinism to be questioned, since conventional elitist wisdom holds it's no longer a theory but an inviolable truth."

Thursday, November 15, 2007

PBS - Intelligent Design on Trial


And I thought reporters and journalists were supposed to be fair, impartial reporters of the news.  PBS cured me of that false impression after I watched their TV special on the trial at Dover which aired on November 13th.


If that PBS show was a trial, it was old Soviet era style.  Fairness and objectivity were things to only be wished for. Truth got the gulag.

Here's a link that points out some of the errors of the producers ways...

http://www.evolutionnews.org/2007/11/pbs_airs_its_inherit_the_wind.html

And the picture of the Book in the upper right corner...that happened by chance to insert itself into this blog.  If billions and billions of pieces of information can come together by natural forces without intelligence and cause the first life, then certainly that picture could get into this blog in the same manner.  The electrons just arranged themselves that way by chance.

Something tells me the average Darwinist won't believe a coincidence involving one picture and one blog, but will believe a coincidence involving billions of informational pieces that are complex and specified.

Does any Darwinist know the origin of the first biological information enabling life? PBS didn't bother to mention issues like that as they ran what amounted to a 2-hour commercial for their favorite philosophy.

Tuesday, November 13, 2007

One Changed Mind


"There Is a God: How the World's Most Notorious Atheist Changed His Mind" 


Antony Flew - on why decades of atheism wasn't correct after all.

I imagine Richard Dawkins has removed Antony from his Christmas list...and the traditional plastic transitional fossil will not be given this year.

I wonder if the plastic transitional fossils climbed mount improbable, or were they designed by a Toy company? Perhaps Richard wouldn't be able to tell either way. 

Wednesday, November 07, 2007

Dr. Scott Chambers Podcast - Cosmological Fine Tuning

The Tri-Cities own Dr. Scott Chambers was recently featured on a Discovery Institute podcast,
“Cosmological Fine Tuning and the Multiverse Model” October 22, 2007

Dr. Chambers explains:
• his current research and interest in the debate over evolution and ID,
• how the evidence for the fine-tuning of the universe and the fundamental constants of physics lead scientists to an inference of design,
• the multiverse hypothesis.

Tuesday, November 06, 2007

Doctors who doubt Darwinism

Just when scientists were trying to tell the world that Darwinism was a fact of science...look who shows up to spoil the party!


Doctors who doubt the philosophy that chance is the father of everything.

Take a look at their web site via the link above.

or Dr. Simmons new book:

Billions of Missing Links 
by Dr. Geoffrey Simmons

Friday, November 02, 2007

Was Intelligent Design the cause of this Pretty Blue Planet?


The Intelligent Design vs. Materialism debate is perhaps one that will never go away. The debate involves more than data as preliminary assumptions and prior biases become vitally important in determining how a person interprets the data and ultimately forms it into some sort of a working worldview that influences their life.

Many scientists are very committed to a materialistic framework. This commitment to a materialistic worldview was clearly demonstrated by Professor Richard Lewontin, a Harvard geneticist, when he said,

“We take the side of science in spite of the patent absurdity of some of its constructs, in spite of its failure to fulfill many of its extravagant promises of health and life, in spite of the tolerance of the scientific community for just-so stories, because we have a prior commitment, a commitment to materialism. It is not that the methods and institutions of science somehow compel us to accept a material explanation of the phenomenal world, but, on the contrary, that we are forced by our a priori adherence to material causes to create an apparatus of investigation and a set of concepts that produce material explanations, no matter how counterintuitive, no matter how mystifying to the uninitiated. Moreover, that materialism is absolute, for we cannot allow a Divine Foot in the door.”

However, when searching for causes in science (especially when dealing in origin science as opposed to operational science) confining the answers to “material causes” from the beginning has the effect of predetermining the end result. If the objective of the search is to find materialistic causes, then perhaps a scientist operating under this paradigm has won, for no other result will be found. If the objective is a true determination of a “cause” responsible for an “effect” then the scientist may have lost - just as those who provided the funding and depended on the result may have lost.

While our world is stressed with present day problems (violence, war, poverty and more) on a grander scale it’s a beautiful place! I hope you will take a look at the attached PDF file. Within the beauty of our universe and planet there is a message, if we just take the time to look, listen, and consider what we are being told.

As the presentation demonstrates, effects have causes, and the causes must exist in time prior to the effect. Just as I don’t see my son being the cause of my father, you too may find it hard to see how Professor Richard Lewontin’s “materialism” can explain the formation of the universe and the materialistic forces he now likes to study. (Or stated in a stronger manner, just as my son can’t be the cause of his grandfather, material forces can’t go back in time and create themselves or anything else before they existed.)

Since we live in a world where the cause comes before the effect, the origin of the universe and origin of life become very interesting topics with meaningful implications.