Scientific outrage!

A paper on the workings of the human hand published in a scientific journal uses the term “creator” and “design,” sparking sputtering outrage and calls for boycotting the publication.

The authors, most of whom are Chinese, say the apparent reference to Intelligent Design was a mistake due to a mistranslation.  Chinese writing does tend to be much more lyrical and metaphorical than the generally dull Western academic prose.

But it’s interesting how so many scientists are set off by words and are so eager to silence people. They do not want themselves to be exposed to anything incompatible with their materialistic worldview, not allowing anything to the contrary to be so much as uttered.  Even the news account from a British publication, excerpted after the jump, feels that it must refer to Intelligent Design as a “pseudo-science.” [Read more…]

Your brain has as much memory as the internet

New research into the brain’s synapses has found that the human brain has 10 times the memory capacity previously thought.  In computer terms, it comes to at least  a petabyte, the memory capacity of the world wide web.

Now use your internet-sized brain to think about that.  Didn’t the world wide web have to be, you know, designed and created?  Could the internet have come into existence purely through random processes?  Yes, the internet is an example of a system with millions of separate agents, sort of like the economy, but doesn’t it require pre-existing minds?  So what about the 7 billion minds existing on the earth today, each with the capacity of the entire internet? [Read more…]

“The next Darwin” says life is inevitable

A 33-year-old physicist at MIT, Jeremy England, is being hailed as “the new Darwin,” for his mathematical models that suggest life is inevitable.  Though some are saying this will pose a problem for creationists and religious people, it looks to me like more evidence for Design.  (The doctrine of creation teaches not just that God created life, but that He created the universe and its laws.)  What many people are missing is that Prof. England, as a devout Jew, believes in God.  An account of this new Darwin and a summary of his theories after the jump. [Read more…]

Language as “Darwin’s problem”

Noam Chomsky is not a conservative Christian but is rather a leftwing radical.  But in his day job, he is a pioneering linguist, having shown how all languages depend on “deep structures”–complex grammatical processes that are built into the human mind–that all languages have in common and that children can master almost without effort.

He has teamed with a famous anthropologist, Ian Tattersall, and other scholars (Johan J. Bolhuis and Robert C. Berwick) to pose the question How Could Language Have Evolved? They certainly believe in evolution and they try to find a minimalistic feature that might have evolved, but the article shows that language, with its irreducible complexity (the intelligence design term, not theirs), is very difficult  to explain in terms of random selection over time, to the point that the authors describe language as “Darwin’s problem.” [Read more…]

Natural Law reconsidered

Natural law as a grounding for morality  is basic to Roman Catholic ethics, though it is variously embraced or rejected by Protestants.   As contemporary society tries to normalize sexual behavior long considered not just immoral but unnatural, natural law ethics have come back into vogue among those who insist that sexual morality is not just a narrow religious conviction but something applicable to everyone.

Protestant philosopher R. J. Snell has written a new book that attempts a new formulation of natural law, one grounded in love.  After the jump, an excerpt from the book that first explains what we mean by natural law.  (And note how the concept that nature has a “design”–c.f. the intelligent design movement–is integral to the idea.)

Later, I intend to post something on the Christian case against natural law theory, and we can weigh the issues. [Read more…]

DNA encodes two languages, not just one

Scientists have discovered that DNA contains not just one but two languages, superimposed over each other.  They knew about the one that determines how proteins are made, but the other embedded language “instructs the cell on how genes are controlled.”

We sure are lucky that random processes led to the evolution of these two languages!  But don’t you need reproduction in order to have evolution?  And don’t you need both of these functions of the DNA to be already in place before there can be any reproduction?  I’m curious how Darwinists explain this.

The news story about this, quoted after the jump, uses terms like “language,” “writing,” “reading,” “meaning,” “information system,” and “instructs.”  So underlying all of life is language; that is, what the Greeks called a logos, the cosmic organizing Word. As in John 1:1-3.

[Read more…]