Archive for February, 2009

References From “Expelled” Event

Saturday, February 28th, 2009

A number of people asked for the references cited in the discussion that followed viewing the movie Expelled on February 27 Th. at Christ Lutheran Church in Costa Mesa, CA. Here they are in no particular order:

1. “Mathematical Challenges to the Neo-Darwinian Interpretation of Evolution”, Edited by Paul Moorhead and Martin Kaplan, The Wistar Institute Symposium Monograph No. 5., 1967

2. “A Case Against Accident and Self-Organization”, Dean Overman, Rowman and Littlefield, Oxford, 2001.

3. “In the Beginning Information”, Werner Gitt, Master Books, 2006.

4. “A Tour of the Calculus” David Berlinski, Vintage Books, New York, 1995.

5. “The Mystery of Life’s Origin” Charles Thaxton, Walter Bradley and Roger Olsen, Lewis and Stanley, Dallas, TX, 1992.

Update 2/14/09 Biblical Minimalists Wrong Again & Brain Hardwired to Believe in God

Friday, February 13th, 2009

1. Biblical Reliability (Archeology)

Israel Finkelstein is the medias favorite archaeologist. He has earned this position through his tireless efforts to discredit the Bible. He is widely regarded as the world’s leading Biblical Minimalist. Minimalists can generally be described as “scholars” who assert that the Bible is nothing more than a collection of myths and political propaganda written centuries after the time period they claim to report. Despite the fact that dozens of Finkelstein’s claims have been shown by subsequent archaeological work to be wrong, the media still maintains him as their leading Biblical archaeological expert.

Among Finkelstein’s many assertions is the claim that the Edomite nation was a latter day creation of the Bible. The Bible records that Edomites were the descendants of Esau, Jacob’s twin brother, and that Edom was a dedicated enemy of early Israel. In all, Edom is mentioned 99 times in the Bible. However Finkelstein in his book “The Bible Unearthed” states that, “Edom did not exist as a distinct political entity until a relatively late period….there were no real kings and no state of Edom before the late Eighth Century BCE.” According to him the Bible’s record of Edom existing during and before the time of David in the Tenth Century BC is pure fiction.

Unfortunately for Finkelstein he has once again been shown to be wrong. The March- April edition of “Archeology” reports the discovery of an Edomite copper processing center in operation in the Tenth Century BC. The “industrial” level of production of copper in Edom at this early date carries with it large implications. “This means that there was a complex society in the area, known then as Edom, when scholars thought it was unoccupied.” Once again the Bible has proven reliable and a critic is left with egg on his face. One can only hope that at some point Finkelstein and the Minimalists will begin to lose credibility with the media.

2. Materialism’s Failure (Cognitive Studies)

Some Materialists have argued that people are born a blank slate upon which environment writes the personality, ergo, no free will. Therefore we are not responsible for our behavior because we have all been shaped by the environments we were raised in. Other Materialists argue that we are completely programmed genetically; therefore we have no free will and once again are not responsible for our actions. So the media treats the public to a stream of scientific claims which demonstrate one or the other, never bothering to note that these two causal agents are mutually exclusive.

In this vein the February issue of the “New Scientist” carried a major article entitled “Natural Born Believers”. The article notes that religious beliefs, as with language and music are a human universal, occurring in every culture on Earth. Studies are cited that demonstrate that children are born with an ability to conceive of God and are strongly pron to attribute design and purpose to the objects that constitute the world. They refer to this behavior as the brain’s inherent “Default to God”.

This finding should be no surprise to Christians. The Bible for example, tells us in Romans 2:15 “since they show that the requirements of the law are written on their hearts, their consciences also bearing witness…” A knowledge of God and morality being part of our natural born programing is no surprise. It seems to me that it is arguable that this discovery is strong evidence that humans are indeed the creation of a benevolent God.

However the authors of this article do not see God’s hand in this, they instead argue that this natural inborn belief in God must have originated through a random evolutionary process as a biological adaptation. They postulate an adaptive advantage for this natural tendency to believe in God.

Of course critics have pointed out that the appearance of any biological trait can be claimed to have had an adaptive advantage for some hypothetical ancient band of ancestors. Conveniently, such speculative claims are beyond scientific investigation. On a personal note I’d be curious to know how genetics could explain the fact that I personally was a strident, committed, orthodox, Marxist atheist until I was in my mid 30’s. Then with in the span of a couple of years became a committed Christian? What myriad of genetic adaptive advantages explains this phenomenon?

Update 2/6/09

Friday, February 6th, 2009

1. Setting the Record Straight - Islam Did not Save Western Science (Revisionist History)

Revisionist historians are working diligently at their task of creating an alternative history: one which suits their ideological and emotional fancies but does not always comport well with the record. For example, in recent years it has become a common place for revisionist historians and especially journalists to state that “Western science is deeply in debt to Islam.” They usually go on to claim that if it were not for the medieval Islamic scholars, the works of Aristotle, Plato and other great Greek Philosophers would have been lost to the modern world. Anthony Pagden’s new book “Worlds At War” is a good example of such claims.

The actual truth of the matter was much better explored by Nineteenth Century Historians such as the great Ernest Renan. Renan clearly showed that with the exception of Averrois all of the major “Islamic scholarly contributions” came from Last Remnant of Christian Persians who were either “converts” from Christianity or scholars raised in areas where there was a strong recent Christian history and a Christian ethos still persisted. (Who knows what a convert to Islam may actually be? It has often proved to simply be people at sword point who wanted to live.) And even in the case of Averrois working in Spain in the 1100’s, his works were later declared heretical by Islamists and ordered destroyed. They only survived because they had been translated into Latin and Hebrew by Jewish and Christian Scholars, actually reversing the direction of salvaging scholarly thought as claimed by modern revisionists.
Also the assertion that the works of the ancient Greeks only survived because of Arabic translations is an enormous distortion. It is true that some of the major works of Aristotle, such as the Organon had been translated into Latin but were lost in Western Roman lands during the “Dark Ages.” However, they were never lost in Greek translations in the Eastern Roman Empire (Byzantium). It was from these sources that the Arabs learned about Aristotle and Plato not the other way around. It is true that Western Scholars in some instances were first reintroduced to Plato and Aristotle by reading Arab translations of the Greek but the claim of revisionists that these works were “saved” by Islamic Scholars is simply not an accurate portrayal of what happened.

2. Shocking Contradictions Go Unrecognized by Darwinists (Darwinism Failure)

“Darwin Was Wrong: Cutting down the tree of life” read the cover of the January 24, 2009 issue of “The New Scientist.” Just one week later the cover of “National Geographic” read “What Darwin Didn’t Know.” While neither story is a repudiation of Darwinism they instead reveal the level of confusion and contradiction that Darwinists have learned to live with and pretend or some how manage not to notice.

For example the main thrust of the story in the “New Scientist” is that modern genetics has destroyed the Darwinist contention that all of the life forms on Earth are descended from one single original organism. “…the tree of life which Darwin used as an organizing principle and which has been a central tenant of biology ever since. Most biologists now accept that the tree is not a fact of nature - it is something we impose on nature…” However the “National Geographic” story is still pushing Darwin’s Tree of Life. It reports that, “When Darwin proposed his tree of life he was frankly guessing.” They however claim that modern genetic studies have proven Darwin’s descent from one common ancestor. “-modern Darwin’s don’t have to guess. They consult genetic scripture.”

The author of this article is correct about modern Biologists consulting genetics but unfortunately for this author that consultation of “genetic scripture” has shown that Darwin was wrong, not right. Perhaps what this author should have titled this “National Geographic” article “What I Don’t Know.”

3. The “Father” of anthropogenic Global Warming “Embarrassed NASA” (Misuse of Science)

James Hansen is widely regarded as the man who first sounded the “alarm on global warming.” Hansen is the Chief Climate Scientist at the NASA Goddard Institute of Space Studies. Hansen has made some of the most outlandish claims about the consequences of his alleged “man caused global warming.” Besides being Al Gores main science consultant on this issue he has also led the fight to silence critics and stifle discussion of alternative interpretations of the data. Over time Hansen has also been found to have fudge data, use the wrong data, misuse climate models and generally ignore or actively tried to suppress counter data. However none of this has tarnished is reputation with the “objective”,”main stream” media.

Now in a January 27, 2009 post on the Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works website, Hansen’s former boss at NASA, Dr. John Theon, has openly broken with him, stating that Hansen had “Embarrassed NASA” with his claims about global warming. Theon was Chief of several NASA Headquarters Programs including Hansen’s and was responsible for all NASA weather and climate research. Theon now says that the claims of man caused global warming are not supported by the data and that the models being used to project climate catastrophe are flawed. “Thus there is no rational justification for using climate model forecasts to determine public policy.”

Hansen also claimed that the “Bush Administration was trying to muzzle him.” Theon points out that this is absolutely not true. First of all NASA has a policy against making forecasts of mans effect on climate change because the science for it is not yet good enough to do this. However despite this policy and despite the fact that the current science is not up to the task Hansen still gave over 1400 interviews on the topic while he worked for NASA and was never sanctioned for this massive violation of agency policy.