Explore by Topic
Explore by Format
Search Results | 30 results found
It’s Darwin Day, a day when evolutionists celebrate “science and reason,” allegedly.
Want to sound like you've refuted your opponent's position? First, take their idea. Next, make it simpler by removing parts you don’t like. And now here’s the key: Attack the weaker version you created – not the original idea. Voila! Now you can publish your article in a prominent magazine and pat yourself on the back.
You've heard the spin. Now read the truth. The first issue of the Journal of Human Sexuality summarizes the scientific research that:
The American Psychological Association rejected the idea that homosexuals can change their same-sex attractions and become heterosexual. Wow, big surprise. I thought they said that years ago. For some time now, the pro-homosexual community has suggested that people should meet a gay man or woman and become friends with them to better understand them. I've done this.
I'll quickly summarize Richard Sternberg's critique I mentioned in my previous post and in my August 2, 2008 interview with Greg.
I was privileged to have dinner with Jonathan Wells Ph.D, Bruce Gordon Ph.D, and Richard Sternberg Ph.D (one of the "expelled" scientists from Ben Stein's documentary) while I've been
I've started reading an interesting book that describes the details of a study conducted by two researchers, Stanton Jones and Mark Yarhouse. There were two goals of the study: 1) to determine whether a homosexual orientation can be changed and 2) whether participating in “ex-gay” ministries is harmful.
According to an article in the San Diego Union Tribune, only half of those surveyed in a recent Gallup poll "believed evolution is definitely or probably true." This baffles some evolutionists.
Evolutionist Michael Ruse was the star of the show at last week's debate against intelligent design (ID) proponent Paul Nelson. He was witty, funny, gracious, and surprisingly theological. His ideas were wrong, however, but I expected that.