Explore by Topic
Explore by Format
Search Results | 84 results found
I want you to think about Darwinian evolution for a moment.The neo-Darwinian synthesis necessarily entails a particular mechanism that determines (an important word) which changes are reproduced in the next generation of living organisms.  This mechanism is called natural selection.
Creation, a film about Charles Darwin's personal life, is not a rant against God or even a story of the heroism of one man crusading for science against religion. Surprisingly, the movie is not polemical. It doesn't bother to argue against religion, nor does it spend time arguing for the truth of evolution. It's clear that the filmmakers assume this fight has already been won, and so the issues remain in the background.
How do you respond to the claim that the universe only has the appearance of design and we can’t draw any inferences about a Creator from that? var src = 'http://www.strcast2.org/videos/flash/player'; if(!DetectFlashVer(9, 0, 0) && DetectFlashVer(8, 0, 0)) src = 'player8'; AC_FL_RunContent('codebase', 'http://download.macromedia.com/pub/shockwave/cabs/flash/swflash.cab#version=9,0,0,0', 'width', 320, 'height', 223, 'src', src, 'pluginspage', 'htt
Brian asks: “Science can't say whether God represents a loving, vengeful or nonexistent being. But researchers have revealed for the first time how such religious beliefs trigger different parts of the brain.”How should we think about these efforts to locate religion in brain activity?
As President Obama reversed Bush's policy against public funding for the destruction of human embryos to create new stem cell lines, he said the following in celebration:
My sister, who works at a university, received an invitation from a group "dedicated to the promotion of evolutionary theory, science and reason" to discuss "the continued significance of Darwin's ideas" on Darwin Day (today).
In a response to the segment in Ben Stein's Expelled that makes a connection between Darwinist thinking and the Holocaust, Richard Dawkins said the following:
After viewing this video of Dawkins apparently being "stumped by creationists' question," I did some digging to find his response, giving him the benefit of the doubt that he was likely just trying to frame his answer in a succinct way, or that he was flustered for some reason other than a lack of an answer.
The Discovery Institute posted a response to Nova's Judgment Day: Intelligent Design on Trial, noting ten of its errors. For example:
A common objection was proposed in the comment section of Tuesday's intelligent design post: