osama bin laden email virus - The Panda's Thumb

Dean Kenyon: a young-earth creation scientist who was later relabeled an intelligent design proponent

By Nick Matzke on July 20, 2010 7:13 PM | 11 Comments (new) | No TrackBacks

Over on the Thinking Christian blog I have been challenged on my assertion in several publications (e.g. in this PNAS article) that “intelligent design” leader Dean Kenyon – a coauthor of Of Pandas and People and a Discovery Institute fellow – is actually a young-earth creationist and “creation scientist.” Usually I get these things right, but I was recently wrong about Cornelius Hunter, and only some of the evidence is on the Dean Kenyon entry on Wikipedia, so it is worth it to review the evidence.

There are many lines of evidence for the proposition that Kenyon is/was a young-earther. It is true that he wasn’t always like this – in the late 1960s he was a young origin-of-life researcher, and he coauthored the book Biochemical Predestination which accepted the standard view on evolution and the age of the Earth. But in the late 1970s he changed his mind:

“Then in 1976, a student gave me a book by A.E. Wilder-Smith, The Creation of Life: A Cybernetic Approach to Evolution. Many pages of that book deal with arguments against Biochemical Predestination, and I found myself hard-pressed to come up with a counter-rebuttal. Eventually, several other books and articles by neo-creationists came to my attention. I read some of Henry Morris’ books, in particular, The Genesis Flood. I’m not a geologist, and I don’t agree with everything in that book, but what stood out was that here was a scientific statement giving a very different view of earth history. Though the book doesn’t deal with the subject of the origin of life per se, it had the effect of suggesting that it is possible to have a rational alternative explanation of the past.”

Kenyon, Dean, and Pearcey, Nancy (1989). “Up From Materialism: An Interview with Dean Kenyon.” Bible-Science Newsletter, 27(9), 6-9. September 1989.

(Note: both A.E. Wilder-Smith and Henry Morris are famous young-earther creation scientists. Nancy Pearcey is a young-earther too – she once wrote that humans were contemporaneous with dinosaurs. And the Bible-Science Newsletter was a famously rabid young-earth publication that sometimes even flirted with geocentrism.)

Continue reading “Dean Kenyon: a young-earth creation scientist who was later relabeled an intelligent design proponent”.

Divergence

By PZ Myers on July 20, 2010 2:16 PM | 3 Comments (new) | No TrackBacks

This is a sweet little story of evolutionary divergence, and a reunion. Of sorts.

Continue reading “Divergence”.

Fraunhofer lines on CD

By Matt Young on July 19, 2010 12:00 PM | 9 Comments (new) | No TrackBacks

Photograph by Kari Tikannen.

Photography contest, Honorable Mention.

Fraunhofer lines appear in sunlight reflected off a CD. The Fraunhofer lines are the dark absorption lines superimposed upon the colored spectrum.

Comment on “Fraunhofer lines on CD”.

CellCraft, a subversive little game

By PZ Myers on July 15, 2010 11:39 AM | 135 Comments (new) | No TrackBacks

A lot of people have been writing to me about this free webgame, CellCraft. In it, you control a cell and build up all these complex organelles in order to gather resources and fight off viruses; it's cute, it does throw in a lot of useful jargon, but the few minutes I spent trying it were also a bit odd — there was something off about it all.

Continue reading “CellCraft, a subversive little game”.

Freshwater: Unresponsive responses

By Richard B. Hoppe on July 14, 2010 10:40 PM | 40 Comments (new) | No TrackBacks

R. Kelly Hamilton and John Freshwater have filed responses to the Dennis family’s memorandum of opposition to reconsideration of the sanctions against Hamilton and Freshwater ordered by the judge in Doe v. Mount Vernon BOE, et al.. I recently described the memorandum in Tightening the vise. The responses are masterpieces of misdirection. See Hamilton’s (pdf) and Freshwater’s (large pdf).

Recall that the memorandum of opposition made two principal allegations:

1. Hamilton and Freshwater claimed that they spent many hours in May 2008 preparing 15 affidavits to give the independent investigators. However, Hamilton’s billing records for the period from mid-April through the end of May 2008, obtained pursuant to a federal court order to the Board of Education’s attorney, show no evidence of affidavit-related activity.

2. Freshwater has been unresponsive to discovery requests and unresponsive to a court order to compel compliance with those requests.

More commentary below the fold

Continue reading “Freshwater: Unresponsive responses”.

Sciurus niger

By Matt Young on July 13, 2010 8:00 AM | 23 Comments (new) | No TrackBacks

Photograph by Deanna Young.

Sciurus niger – fox squirrel. According to an article in the Times, his relative, the eastern gray squirrel, S. carolinensis, is considered an invasive species in Europe.

Comment on “Sciurus niger”.

Church Signs on CNN iReport

By Reed A. Cartwright on July 13, 2010 1:59 AM | 74 Comments (new) | No TrackBacks

For some strange reason, CNN’s iReport website wants people to post photos of church signs. Given the existence of websites to create fake church signs, this seems ripe for abuse. While looking at an article today, one of the signs popped up in the side bar, and it was a “deep” insight into evolution. From Venice, Florida:

Five years of grad school destroyed by the “wisdom” of this church’s sign!

Comment on “Church Signs on CNN iReport”.

Random responses to Luskin on evolution of creationism, quotes, and information

By Nick Matzke on July 12, 2010 10:38 PM | 132 Comments (new) | No TrackBacks

(Note: I got off on some tangents in this post – big tangents, not having written a Luskin-rebuttal in awhile. In some cases – most of them, probably – I may be the only person in the world who would bother to rebut these points. But, hey, everyone needs a summer vacation, and Luskin usually takes lack of response as evidence that he must be right. This is hilarious, but it’s funniest when he relies on an argument for many years, getting more and more confident in it. But, eventually someone has to pop the bubble. I really have to stop now so please point out errors, which must exist, and I will fix when I get a chance.)

Casey Luskin has responded to my recent article “The Evolution of Creationist Movements” in Evolution: Education and Outreach. My article is freely online, so you should read it and all of the other great pieces in that issue, which was a festschrift for Eugenie C. Scott (only a few of the articles are currently open access, however).

Luskin raises 3 issues. I will answer in 3 parts:

Continue reading “Random responses to Luskin on evolution of creationism, quotes, and information”.

Another really dumb poll question about evolution

By Richard B. Hoppe on July 12, 2010 6:21 PM | 56 Comments (new) | No TrackBacks

Possibly stimulated by Jerry Coyne’s post, there’s a spate of web attention to a survey concerning evolution, science, and religion performed by the Center for Public Policy of Virginia Commonwealth University (pdf here). The survey was purportedly performed in collaboration with VCU Life Sciences. I seriously wonder who they consulted in the Life Sciences. It surely could not have been an evolutionary biologist, because like so many such surveys, this one asks a stupid question, and commenter Kevin on Coyne’s blog nails it:

I have a HUGE problem with question 1.

“Which of these statements comes closest to your views on the origin of biological life:”

What? Are you talking about abiogenesis? How am I to know whether it happened all at once or gradually over time?

The alternatives offered were

– Biological life developed over time from simple substances, but God guided this process,
– Biological life developed over time from simple substances but God did not guide this process,
– God directly created biological life in its present form at one point in time?

[Note: the order of answers was randomized among people]

Kevin went on:

Now, if you’re talking EVOLUTION, that’s a different kettle of fish. That can be defined as “diversity of life forms on this planet.” That we know a LOT more about.

But “origins of life”? Not so much.

Bad poll question. Horridly bad. Almost designed to allow theists to wedge a god into a gap.

Exactly right. This poll in fact tells us precisely nothing about acceptance of evolution because of the sloppy wording of that question. Worse, asking the question that way merely propagates the creationist conflation of the question of abiogenesis and the reality of evolution. So again, I wonder who in the VCU Life Sciences they actually consulted on that question.

Comment on “Another really dumb poll question about evolution”.

Evil Monkey See, Evil Monkey Do

By Reed A. Cartwright on July 12, 2010 12:48 AM | 12 Comments (new) | No TrackBacks

“Never slaughter a chicken in front of a monkey:”

A Chinese man who saved a one-armed, one-legged monkey says the primate has paid him back - by killing all of his chickens.

<bevis>
Good thing the monkey didn’t see the farmer choke his chicken.
</butthead>

Comment on “Evil Monkey See, Evil Monkey Do”.

More DI Word Games

By Guest Contributor on July 10, 2010 10:08 PM | 235 Comments (new) | No TrackBacks

by Mark Farmer, http://www.uga.edu/cellbio/people/farmer.html

Intelligent Design Creationism has evolved yet again. In preparing for a discussion last month (May) with Charles Thaxton I went to the DI’s site to see what their definition of ID was. What I found was this:

Intelligent design is a scientific theory which holds that certain features of the universe and living things are best explained by an intelligent cause, and are not the result of an undirected, chance-based process such as Darwinian evolution.

OK so what does the same site say today, a month later?

Intelligent design refers to a scientific research program as well as a community of scientists, philosophers and other scholars who seek evidence of design in nature. The theory of intelligent design holds that certain features of the universe and of living things are best explained by an intelligent cause, not an undirected process such as natural selection.

Notice the two important differences? 1) Apparently ID is no longer a “scientific theory” instead it now refers to “a scientific research program” and 2) ID is no longer contrasted with “chance-based process such as Darwinian evolution.” but rather is now compared to “an undirected process such as natural selection.”

It makes one wonder whether this is simply the natural evolution of ID as it continually adapts to an ever changing environment or whether recent court defeats, rejections by state school boards, and continued lack of intellectual advancement have brought about their own form of punctuated equilibria for intelligent design.

Comment on “More DI Word Games”.

A Hate Mail Poe?

By Reed A. Cartwright on July 10, 2010 9:55 PM | 50 Comments (new) | No TrackBacks

Daily Kos has posted the best of their Q2 hate mail, and number 2 concerns evolution:

Evolution is a LIE!

You are a LIAR and a FRAUD for spreading your bullshit evolution prpaganda! evolution has never been proven to work and it’s not even logical. Let me tell you a fun story. My friend’s seven year old nephew died of cancer two months ago. How the fuck is that evolution? Evolution is supposed to guarantee that all individuals get to procreate: this is called “fitness” (your word, not mine)! If someone dies at 7, he doesn’t get to procreate. This happens all the time. It also proves that evoution doesn’t work EVEN BY YOUR OWN FUCKED UP STANDARDS! Why would evolution make people have cancer? what “advantage “ do you get from having cancer? Evolutionists have got to be the dumbest fucking retards this side of scientology. Need more proof? How’s this: if birds “evolved” magically from dinosaurs (tyranosaurus?), then there should be a creature that’s 99% dinosaur and 1% bird, then another thats 98% dinosaur and 2% bird and so on. Am I going too fast for you? It’s called basic logic, you shitbrain retard. Now, show me a fossil of a 82/18 dinosaur/bird? Or 61/39? Wait! Maybe they don’t exist! How fucking stupid do you have to be to believe something that’s obviously bullshit? Did your mommy drop you on your head? You mock people’s faith in God when you yourselves have faith in stuff that’s not even remotely reasonable. Your probably not really evil, just really fucking stupid and brainwashed. So why dont you pull your head from your ass and look at how retarded your evolution cult really is.

and maybe you’l wake up and realize you’ve been fucked over and defrauded.

I want to call “Poe”, but a Poe should make more sense.

Comment on “A Hate Mail Poe?”.

Chris Comer loses appeal

By Matt Young on July 9, 2010 4:25 PM | 42 Comments (new) | No TrackBacks

We received the following announcement from the National Center for Science Education and reproduce it with permission:

Continue reading “Chris Comer loses appeal”.

Freshwater: Summary of legal proceedings and main players

By Richard B. Hoppe on July 8, 2010 12:36 AM | 10 Comments (new) | No TrackBacks

I’ve been informed that I’ve been negligent in keeping the dramatis personae and various legal actions in the Freshwater affair clearly distinguished. Let me summarize below the fold.

Continue reading “Freshwater: Summary of legal proceedings and main players”.

Freshwater: Will a quick settlement be reached?

By Richard B. Hoppe on July 7, 2010 11:49 AM | 54 Comments (new) | No TrackBacks

I pose that as a genuine question; I have no inside information. But I got to thinking this morning about the legal representation situation in Doe v. Mount Vernon Board of Education, et al in which Freshwater is the sole remaining defendant. Recall that in late April the two insurance company lawyers representing Freshwater in that case, Jason Deschler and Robert Stoffers, petitioned the court to withdraw from representing him. (Freshwater claimed that he fired them.) Two new lawyers, Steven C. Findley and Sandra R. McIntosh, were retained by the insurance company to replace them. Now this billing records mess gets dropped in their laps. One wonders how they’re thinking now that there’s documentary evidence of the shenanigans Hamilton and Freshwater have been pulling on the federal court in that case and how long the insurance company will hold out in settlement talks under these circumstances. Recall that the case is to go to trial July 26.

As I understand the process, Freshwater and Hamilton have to respond to the memorandum in opposition very soon–I think this week–and the judge will make a decision based on the documents submitted. (I was hoping for an oral hearing: I’d be willing to drive 1.5 hours in rush hour traffic to see that!) But this has to put pressure on Freshwater’s insurance company lawyers to reach a settlement before the judge rules, since if the judge grants either of the Dennises’ requests for sanctions (default judgment in their favor or an adverse evidentiary inference against Freshwater regarding the missing material), it will result in the crippling of any defense they might try to put on, and they have to know that. This is speculative, but it now would not surprise me to see a sudden settlement of Doe v. Mount Vernon Board of Education, possibly even this week.

Comment on “Freshwater: Will a quick settlement be reached?”.

Freshwater: Tightening the vise

By Richard B. Hoppe on July 6, 2010 8:40 PM | 67 Comments (new) | No TrackBacks

The pressure on John Freshwater and his attorney R. Kelly Hamilton was ratcheted up last Friday, July 2, when the attorney for the Dennis family in Doe v. Mount Vernon Board of Education et al. filed a memorandum in opposition (pdf) to Freshwater and Hamilton’s motion for reconsideration of the federal court’s ruling that the two are liable for sanctions–attorney fees–due to non-compliance with discovery requests. That memorandum, written by Douglas Mansfield, the Dennises’ attorney, is full of bad news for Freshwater and Hamilton.

Details below the fold

Continue reading “Freshwater: Tightening the vise”.

The resurrection of Omphalos

By Richard B. Hoppe on July 5, 2010 4:45 PM | 300 Comments (new) | No TrackBacks

I’ve said in several venues that should the theocrats win, the next day blood will flow down the aisles and under the pews (one hopes only metaphorically, though that’s by no means guaranteed). We see that metaphor scenario playing out in a number of venues in contemporary Christianity. Ken Ham rails against theistic evolution, arguing that its acceptance of an old earth/universe erodes the authority of scripture, and now Albert Mohler, President of Southern Baptist Theological Seminary (William Dembski’s former employer), all but accuses Francis Collins’ BioLogos Forum of apostasy (or so Darrell Falk interprets it) on much the same grounds, while endorsing the venerable appearance of age notion to account for the data of physics, geology, paleontology, and evolutionary biology.

More below the fold

Continue reading “The resurrection of Omphalos”.

Castle Rock - South Table Mountain

By Matt Young on July 5, 2010 12:00 PM | 20 Comments (new) | No TrackBacks

Castle Rock – part of the basalt rock cap atop South Table Mountain, Golden, Colorado, 2009.

Comment on “Castle Rock - South Table Mountain”.

The Future of this Country? Please No!

By Reed A. Cartwright on July 4, 2010 4:13 PM | 164 Comments (new) | 1 TrackBack

I guess I’ll have to watch beautiful explosions in the night sky to feel better.

HT: Troy Britain

Comment on “The Future of this Country? Please No!”.

Can radio waves harm trees?

By Matt Young on July 4, 2010 3:41 PM | 36 Comments (new) | No TrackBacks

Katie Haggerty, a woman who lives near Lyons, Colorado, thinks it is a possibility. Ms. Haggerty, who claims no academic or scientific credentials whatsoever, has performed some experiments to test this hypothesis.

According to an article by Bruce Leaf in today’s Boulder Daily Camera, Ms. Haggerty has thought for years that radio waves might be harming her geraniums. So she put some plants inside a Faraday cage, an enclosure that blocks radio waves, and thought she saw improvement in the growth of plants.

A few years ago, she graduated to aspen trees, which are dying in Colorado. Thinking that the cause might be radio waves, not drought, she performed a controlled experiment in which she placed some aspen seedlings into a Faraday cage and some in a fiberglass cage (which will not block radio waves), and also grew some seedlings in the absence of a cage.

Continue reading “Can radio waves harm trees?”.