teleologist’s theology
Posted by teleologist | Filed under teleologist's theology
click on post title to theology page
OM and His Buddies on Fairytales
Posted by teleologist | Filed under Darwinism
Over at Dr. Hunter’s blog I’ve challenged the Darwinian worshippers to produce evidence for the following.
1. Cladistics will objectively produce a nested hierarchy, independent of traits.
2. Nested hierarchy is the exclusive domain of Darwinism.
3. Cladistics hierarchy is nothing more than a contrived organization methodology and has no evidential value in supporting common descent.
Creation of a Bacterial Cell Controlled by a Chemically Synthesized Genome
Posted by teleologist | Filed under Biology, Dstortions
This post title was taken directly from the Sciencexpress research article title. Here are a few headlines from the popular press.
1st cell with synthetic genome — TheScientist
J. Craig Venter Institute creates first synthetic life form — The Christian Science Monitor
Scientists Create First Self-Replicating Synthetic Life — Wired
I think the media is more about sensationalized entertainment than informative reporting, but you would expect them to at least accurately report the facts somewhere in their reporting. I shouldn’t be surprise at the exaggerated claims from the popular press, except over time we have become desensitized to this misreporting and we are being collectively brainwashed to believe the popular press rather than reality. I think this is also in part for the widespread acceptance of Darwinism.
I want to commend Venter and his team for doing some amazing bioengineering work. It will undoubtedly lead to other breakthroughs in treating illnesses. However it does fall far short of what scientists ultimately would like to do, i.e. to create life from scratch. In other words, what Venter has done is still a long way from what the popular press headlines are claiming.
What Venter’s team has accomplished is exactly what they set out to do as reported back in 2003 and I posted about it here in 2005. While this is a remarking piece of bioengineering, in truth Venter has not actually created any life. He merely took the digitized genome of a Mycoplasma mycoides, assembled the DNA from small pieces and inserted it into the cell of a Mycoplasma capricolum with its genetic material removed through enzymatic process.
I don’t know about you but the headline says “first synthetic life” or “Create First Self-Replicating Synthetic Life” I would expect a de novo DNA of a genomic sequence that does not exist. I would expect something from molecules to a self replicating cell. In the whole scheme of things, this is more like copying someone else’s homework with borrowed papers and pen. Unfortunately, I think scientists sometimes are complicit in misleading the public by not admonishing or even correcting these sensational headlines. This kind of misinformation does not ultimately benefit science.
Darwin’s Dilemma
Posted by teleologist | Filed under Biology, Darwinism, Evolution, Intelligent Design
I am looking forward to watching Darwin’s Dilemma.
How P.Z. Myers Does Science?
Posted by teleologist | Filed under Atheism, Darwinism, Evolution
A few weeks ago PZ defended his religion of Darwinism in the post Darwin and the vermiform appendix. PZ Myers is a Darwinian Prior, who refuse to allow silly things like facts stand in the way of his worship of atheism. So when a lot of press starts to suggest evolution might be in error, PZ the Darwinian Prior, must spin the fairy tale once again.
Where they go awry, though, is in trying to pick a fight with a dead man, and making that the focus of their public relations. … Charles Darwin is dead. Your research can’t be very cogent if your approach to drum up interest is to dig up a 120-year-old corpse and kick it around; is there anyone alive who disagrees with you who can put up a more informative and entertaining struggle? What this does is pick this one fellow as a symbol of the whole edifice of evolutionary theory
I agree. Darwin is dead and no one should make him the symbol of the whole edifice of evolutionary fairy tale theory. I mean only a crazy person would make such a big deal about a dead guy right? A rational and smart scientist like PZ would never make such a big deal about a 120 year old corpse who does not have very cogent research to science, right? Hey, PZ do you know the Darwin corpse worshipper from Fairyngula who said this?
Get out and celebrate the 200th anniversary of the birth of one of the most important scientists of all time, Charles Darwin, and the 150th anniversary of the publication of one of the most important books in biology, On the Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection, or the Preservation of Favoured Races in the Struggle for Life. It’s that day!
Atheist Darwinian Bigot
Posted by teleologist | Filed under Atheism, Darwinism
I know I am being redundant with the post title.
Darwinian Mahmoud Ahmadinejad Syndrome
Posted by teleologist | Filed under Darwinism, Education
The Darwinian Mahmoud Ahmadinejad syndrome.
Roger DeHart and a particularly egregious example of Darwinian persecution that occurred in 2000 and 2001 in Burlington, Washington. DeHart, then a veteran Washington state High School biology teacher, tried to supplement his biology textbook with articles critical of Haeckel’s embryos and peppered moths from mainstream science publications, such as The American Biology Teacher, Natural History, The Scientist, and Nature. You can guess what happened next. The American Civil Liberties Union issued veiled threats of legal action, and the National Center for Science Education, a pro-Darwin lobby group, insisted that DeHart teach only the evidence that allegedly supports Darwinism. Bowing to the intimidation, the superintendent of DeHart’s school district prohibited him from distributing the articles– or even talking about them. DeHart was subsequently removed from his biology teaching position, replaced by a junior faculty member with a degree in physical education.
Poor PZ! He tried. He “really, honestly tried!”
Posted by DonaldM | Filed under Biology, Darwinism, Humor, entertainment
The (in)famous PZ Myers, well-known ID critic and staunch Darwinist and philosophical naturalist, is at it again. He has written a “review” of The Spiritual Brain: A Neuroscientist’s Case for the Existence of the Soul by Mario Beauregard and Denyse O’Leary. PZ starts off in a huff:
I tried. I really, honestly, sincerely tried. I’ve been struggling with this book, The Spiritual Brain: A Neuroscientist’s Case for the Existence of the Soul, by Mario Beauregard and Denyse O’Leary, for the past week and a half, and I’ve finally decided it’s not worth the effort. It’s just about completely unreadable.
Poor fellow. It must have been a real effort for him to try to comprehend the book. Read the rest of this entry »
Pixie’s Misrepresents Behe on Common Descent
Posted by teleologist | Filed under Atheism, Dstortions
This post is created to hold the OT comments from Methodological Naturalism: Is it Necessary for Science?
Its All About the Evidence…Evidently!
Posted by DonaldM | Filed under Atheism, Intelligent Design, Philosophy, Theology
In many discussions across the blogoshere about the existence of God or supernatural entities, the claim is often made that there’s no reason to think that such things exist because there simply is “no evidence”. Those who do think such entities exist are either “delusional” a la Richard Dawkins, or holding such beliefs “without evidence”. In either case, the theist has somehow failed in his or her epistemic duties to retain such beliefs, especially in our modern, scientific world.
But what precisely is the problem? Is it really a case of “no evidence”, meaning that no observation or phenomenon has ever or could ever provide evidence for the existence of God?
If that is what is meant, it would seem to be reasonable to ask for evidence that such a claim is true. But what that evidence would even look like isn’t at all clear. Or maybe what is meant is that there may be some observations that could be seen by some as evidence for the existence of God, but that there are no known principles that can connect that evidence to the conclusion. In its stronger forms, it is added that no one has ever or will ever know of such principles. What evidence there is for such a claim isn’t clear either. Read the rest of this entry »
Methodological Naturalism: Is it Necessary for Science?
Posted by DonaldM | Filed under Atheism, Darwinism, Intelligent Design, Philosophy
I’ve recently had the “privilege” of discussing some of the implications of so-called methodological naturalism (MN) on one or two blogs. For Darwinists, especially Darwinists who take philosophical naturalism (PN) as true, MN is an absolute necessity for scientific practice.
Thus MN becomes an extension of PN, and has the effect of making science a correlate of PN. Now, many defenders of MN would argue that isn’t the case at all and that MN is quite separate from PN and in no way implies its truth or even demands that PN be followed. But is that possible? Given what MN says and how it operates within science, is there a principled way to distinguish between it and full-blown PN?
I don’t think there is. Read the rest of this entry »
My retreat from the public view….
Posted by scordova | Filed under blog specific issues
In case you all haven’t heard:
My retreat from the public view….
God bless everyone!
New Movie Exposes Darwinist Assaults on Academic Freedom
Posted by fdocc | Filed under Darwinism
Premise media has just announced the release of Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed, a new film on the intelligent design controversy starring Ben Stein, due out this February.
Expelled takes a fresh look at the debate as Ben Stein interviews the prominent scientists and academics on both sides of the issue, including ardent Darwinists Richard Dawkins, PZ Myers, and Eugenie Scott, and design proponents such as Stephen Meyer, Jonathan Wells, and Guillermo Gonzalez.
Cutting through the rhetoric, the movie gets to the meat of the story — what is happening to scientists and professors who support intelligent design, and, perhaps more disturbingly, why is it happening?
According to the film’s press release, Expelled is
“a disturbing new documentary that will shock anyone who thinks all scientists are free to follow the evidence wherever it may lead.”
Ben Stein, a pop-culture icon who is also a lawyer, an economist, a former presidential speechwriter, author and social commentator,
“uncovers a long line of biologists, astronomers, chemists and philosophers who have had their reputations destroyed and their careers ruined by a scientific establishment that allows absolutely no dissent from Charles Darwin’s theory of random mutation and natural selection.”
Any film willing to ask these questions will spark controversy and turn up the heat on the entrenched Darwinian establishment. Expelled takes a look at several recent assaults on the academic freedom of pro-intelligent design scientists, including Drs. Richard Sternberg, Carolyn Crocker, Guillermo Gonzalez, and (unfortunately) many, many more. By exposing their stories to a national audience, Expelled reveals the stark truth: Darwinists have been conspiring to keep design out of classrooms, out of journals, and out of public discourse.
Read Bruce Chapman’s comments about the film at Evolution News & Views.
Visit the film’s website here.
Prominent Darwinist commits suicide
Posted by scordova | Filed under Atheism
Clark Adams was on the board of directors of Internet Infidels, the organization that hosts the infamous “swamp” (the infidels creation/evolution discussion board).
It was the swamp creatures the heroic ID proponents and creationists have fought on the internet in various places for many years, and these battle continue to this day…
But now, one of the Darwinsits generals in the person of Clark Adams falls on his owns sword in the middle of battle!
At first I was about to seriously gloat that yet another Darwinist was vanquished. He killed himself in a manner thoroughly consistent with his pointless Darwinian world view. But alas, I find the passing of this particular enemy to be an unhappy event…
Read the rest of this entry »
Young Cosmos Weblog Operational!
Posted by scordova | Filed under Darwinism
A pro-ID YEC weblog has been launched!
Visit:
Hector Avalos faces his match on the internet
Posted by scordova | Filed under Humor
Avalos is the Darwinist villain at ISU who tries to emulate Nero. He persecutes honorable Christian professors like scientist Guillermo Gonzalez. It turns out, Bill Dembski may have caught Hector telling a fib. Too early to tell, but see the continuing drama : here.
I have a video however of the fate of Hector. Hector fought Achilles. Achilles was the guy who snuck inside the Trojan Horse. Now, ya know, I’m just gonna have to root for the guy who snuck inside the Trojan Horse!
Atheist Bigots Abound
Posted by teleologist | Filed under Atheism, Darwinism, Intelligent Design
While not every Darwinist is an atheist, just about every atheist is a Darwinist. So don’t tell me that there is no connection between ID, Darwinism and Atheism.
Thank you to EN&V for bringing this bigotry to our attention and another demonstration of atheist morality.
Chronicle of Higher Education Unearths New Evidence in Support of Gonzalez, But Tries to Discount It
Iowa State’s Spokesman Tells Another Whopper about University’s Tenure Standards
U.S. Senator Expresses Alarm Over Denial of Tenure to Gonzalez at Iowa State
Key Developments in Gonzalez Tenure Denial Case, May 14-19
Darwinists Spread Misinformation about Guillermo Gonzalez’s Denial of Tenure
ISU Faculty Admit ID Played Role in Gonzalez Tenure Denial
Intellectually Fulfilled Theism
Posted by derudo | Filed under Atheism, Darwinism, Intelligent Design, Theology
Isn’t it interesting that 19th century (the great “death of God” era) Darwinian “science” made it possible for Dawkins to become an intellectually fulfilled atheist, but that late 20th century science has made faith and theism more rational and reasonable than ever before in human history (in my opinion)? It’s an interesting turn of events. The “science” in which Dawkins put his atheistic faith turned out to be bogus.
It turns out that the universe did not always exist, and that it began in a flash of light (high-frequency gamma rays, but that’s electromagnetic radiation, just like light, only much more highly energetic). And who would have expected in Darwin’s time that life was not fundamentally based on chemistry, physics, and probability, but on information, information processing, and nano-technology super-machines?
Paul had it all figured out 2,000 years ago when he pointed out in the book of Romans that we are without excuse to disbelieve, because God has made Himself evident in things that are made (i.e., designed), and these things are all around us, especially us, who are fearfully and wonderfully made.
What Darwinism cannot do for us
Posted by scordova | Filed under Darwinism
It has been presumed by the critics of ID that religious beliefs like Christianity are sustained primarily through socializing mechanisms.
Perhaps they believe that through alternative socializing mechanisms religion can be destroyed. Consider the petttion Dawkins signed to label Christianity as child abuse.
However, there is reason to think such anti-religion measures would not succeed because some people’s religion was not originated from socializing mechanisms.
Consider the near death experience and conversion of George Foreman. He was an impoverished teenage criminal that eventually reformed into the multi-millionaire minister of the Gospel he is today [reportedly signed a 137 million contract among other mutli-million dollar contracts].
See the abbreviated version of Foreman’s story: George Foreman beyond.. part4
Foreman is an example of what “the God Delusion” can do for someone’s life. “The God Delusion” can reform a formerly impoverished criminal and make him an upstanding and wealthy member of society.
From an operational perspective, it seems counter productive to industry to suppress certain forms of “the God delusion”.
In contrast, societies predicated on destroying the God delusion have been abysmal failures (can we say Stalin and Mao and Hitler). Darwinism is only useful for puppy beaters, and Foreman’s life is an example of what Darwinism cannot do for us.
PS
For interested readers, I strongly encourage watching the entire story:
Darwin’s Victim
Posted by scordova | Filed under Darwinism, Humor
I beat a puppy, I believe, simply from enjoying the sense of power.
Charles “Gas” Darwin
Jack Krebs gets 2007 Darwin Award
Posted by scordova | Filed under Darwinism
I’m pleased to announce that Jack Krebs, President of KCFS (Kansas Center For Sewage, a Darwinist organization for indoctrinating public school children into Darwinism) and author at PandasThumb is the recipient of the 2007 Darwin Awards conferred by the NCSE.
Featured above is Krebs with Darwin Chic Liz Craig.
I’d like to congratulate Jack on this honor.
Noticed the award has a picture of Charles “Gas” Darwin at the top. It looks really splendid.
Congratulations, Jack!
I was nicknamed “Gas.”
Charles Darwin
Autobiography
