Apparently, it is possible to find hallmarks of design in biological organisms, no matter how much the Darwinists deny it. Wired did it. The Venter Institute apparently put watermarks in some genomes they designed, and some quick study of design detection was able to ferret out those marks. So, why do Darwinists tell us that this is something that can’t be done? Beats me, because we see once again that it is possible to detect design in living organisms. This is a direct proof of principle for ID and a great victory.
Monthly Archives: February 2008
One more thing I missed during my illness was Ken Miller’s new gambit, wherein he has decided to co-opt design for evolution. Miller’s a pretty smart guy, but does he really think he can do this?
“There is, indeed, a design to life — an evolutionary design,” Miller said. “The structures in our bodies have changed over time, as have its functions. Scientists should embrace this concept of ‘design,’ and in so doing, claim for science the sense of orderly rationality in nature to which the anti-evolution movement has long appealed.”
So, he hopes to use the obvious design in life and simply re-label it so that it becomes part of evolution…and he thinks no one will notice his sleight of hand? This is ridiculous, and it shows the depths to which the Darwinists will sink in order to keep their tenuous grasp on their failing ideology.
This is truly a sad tale for our mammalian friends, bats. Some weird condition is killing bats off in the Northeast and no one knows why yet. If you like to go caving, please refrain during this time, as people may be spreading the problem.
Another thing I missed while laid up, was a bat fossil find that is pretty cool. I think bats are pretty cool critters, as different as they are from most other mammals. This find leaves a lot of questions, and it helps fill in a gap for common design as well as common descent. So, let’s enjoy this one.
Well, I’m back and trying to get back into the flow of blogging. This first week here might be choppy while I try to get back into my rythym. It’s amazing how much a bad illness can throw things off.
Anyway, while I was being attacked by the influenza virus – and what a vicious attack it was – I missed some things that happened. First and foremost was the action in Florida, where the science standards were accepted with the caveat that evolution would be denoted as a theory. This is both good and bad. Really, the science standards should include evolution, as our students should learn it. Too bad they will only learn the materialist version where it is fact and there are no weaknesses to it. They will learn that there are no alternatives to evolution and that no one has any questions about it. It’s really a shame, and attaching the word, “Theory” to it really does not begin to do justice to how the students in Florida will be shortchanged in all this. It’s a step up from not learning evolution at all, but it could be so much better.
Some teachers there did understand what was at stake at least, and we can hope that teachers like this one will be able to give the students a full education on the topic of evolution.
Well, Mother Nature has seen fit to visit me with a nasty flu bug and created this unannounced blogging break. Four days of fever, coughing, congestion, headache, shivers, etc, and I’m not sure it’s done yet. And, it’s come at the most Murphy-esque time imaginable, as I was working extra hours (more than the extra I normally work) to take some last data for a paper that I’m hoping to write soon. I’m wondering if the extra stress lowered my defenses, but what can you do about it? So, I’m now on the mend (hopefully) and will try to start up blog posts again sometime in the next couple days.
I’ve just finished Christopher Hitchens’ polemic against god and theism and I have to say that I’m not impressed with anything, save for Hitchens’ almost unparalleled narcissism. The common theme of this book is this: sometimes religious people do bad things, therefore religion is bad and god does not exist. Sometimes he mixes it up a bit by saying something along the lines of this: I think that religious ideas are stupid, therefore they are man made and god does not exist. And, of course, because he is so brilliant – or so he thinks – whatever he says is prima facie evidence for whatever he says. It’s actually a bit ridiculous.
I did have high hopes for one section, however, that started out pretty grandly. In chapter seventeen he endeavors to take on the argument that atheism has had its own despots and is behind some of the worst attrocities ever inflicted upon mankind. He promises to give a detailed reply, but falls well short of the mark. The next 20 pages or so are dedicated to attacking the Catholic Church for aiding the atheists in their evil ventures, which he then uses to declare that atheists were never at fault at all, it was the Catholics all along. He then talks about Lenin and Stalin, but never gets around to saying anything that resembles any sort of defense for atheism.
In conclusion, this is a rather vapid and ineffectual read. Hitchens has no proof to offer of anything except his own opinions, which come off as rambling and incoherent in the end. He resorts to, “Because I say so,” argumentation, all the while belittling his oponents without regard for anything but his own ego. I’m glad that I got this at the library and didn’t waste any money on it.