Casey Luskin explains intelligent design, sharing evidence for design and responding to evolutionary claims and counter-arguments.
The cosmos is all there is, was, or ever will be.” Carl Sagan recited this creed at the outset of each episode of Cosmos, the wildly popular PBS show that debuted in the 1980s. A generation later, Seth MacFarlane, the creator of Family Guy, has revived the show, which is devoted to a reverent, accessible, and almost giddy exploration of the universe.
Although Bill Nye claims that creationism is not a viable model of origins in today’s scientific era, he remained baffled by the origins of consciousness and the cause of the big bang. “It’s a mystery!” he exclaimed. Origins matter. If human beings were created in the image of God, then we are more than mere animals.
It’s the first day of school. As you walk out of Biology class, your friend, Joey, pulls up beside you in the hall and says, “Mr. Matson was really onto that “evolution” and “creation” thing today in class. I don’t see what the big problem is. What does it matter what you think about how life originated?
Joey has a point. What difference does it make what you believe about the origin of life?
Duane Gish, noted creationist, lays out a case against evolution, drawing on evidence from the fossil record, homology, vestigial organs, molecular biology, embryology, and the Second Law of Thermodynamics.
To say that the battle between creation and evolution rages today would be, as the proverbial saying goes, an understatement. Why has this topic become such a point of contention since the publishing of Darwin’s The Origin of Species? Is the main reason a simple disagreement about what the empirical data represents or is there something more going on? The short answer is yes and yes.
Many people today have the impression there is a war between modern science and religion, and that science has won the day. But is that really the case? Are scientific knowledge and religious ideas incompatible? Has science replaced religion as the means for understanding life and mankind’s place in the universe?
Our 2008 Australian Summit was conducted in Melbourne at the Deakin University campus. The college bookstore was drenched in Richard Dawkins. His picture was everywhere, promoting his book The God Delusion. But nowhere to be found were any works challenging Dawkin’s atheism, evolution, humanism (but I repeat myself).
Ben Stein’s film Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed has broken through the steel ceiling around Colorado Springs, Colorado. The Colorado Springs Gazette devoted nearly a page to the discussion of Intelligent Design.
Most of us take academic freedom for granted. We assume that freedom of speech applies not only to the political and social arena but also to the halls of education. However, the foundations of freedom are experiencing seismic tremors in the academy. In the area of science education the freedom to pursue the truth where ever it leads is experiencing a major setback. It is the equivalent of a modern-day black-list!
Over a decade ago the Harvard University Gazette carried an article by William J. Cromie, which began, “Jack Szostak is trying to make a living organism out of nonliving chemicals.”
Szostak has decided that the best candidate for the first organism is “a bit of ribonucleic acid (RNA) enclosed in a plain capsule.” That sounds so scientifically romantic, but the article fails to mention how complex both items are!
Richard Dawkins, Oxford professor and bestselling author, is out to convince the public that macro-evolution — the idea that all present forms of life have evolved from simpler forms — is the scientific gospel. But there is a fly in this naturalistic ointment that undermines Dawkins’ premise and makes his conclusion untenable. Worldview analysis uncovers the problem.