evolution

My new article is titled:
Charles Darwin and modern science on life’s origins

It provides some background on the issue and also a launching pad for a video on the subject which I attached below, here is a snipped from the article:

This is a unique documentary for various reasons such as it being Illustra Media’s first Blue-Ray DVD release as well as the fact that:

…for decades, the production of wildlife documentaries has been almost exclusively the domain of National Geographic and the BBC (Nova, Nature, etc).
Their films are brilliantly produced, with stunning photography and riveting stories. Yet, almost invariably, they are based upon the premise that all life on Earth is the product of blind, undirected materialistic processes.

Here is a little video of Richard Dawkins, Michael Ruse, et al., claiming that were are apes…and should be proud of it to boot!

This glorified animal approach is part of atheism’s consoling delusions: the consoling delusion of absolute autonomy and the consoling delusion of lack of ultimate accountability.

Here is the first of a series about a group of pro-atheism anti-Christians:

The “Science Club of Long Island” elucidates the theory of evolution

New article on the new TV show Terra Nova:
Terra Nova: multiverse and Darwinism (and Obama)

The title of the article just about says it all: this is an exercise in worldview thinking and the discernment that comes therewith.

Yes, the school yard, name calling, bully tactics never end:
On Darwinian dogmatheism, IDiots and other religious ignorami

Karl Popper was merely one victim of Darwinian orthodoxy’s black listing tactics (see Atheism and "The Wedgie" Document).

Such is the title of a recent post over at Examiner:

New Atheist stoicism

According to Richard Dawkins: what is the conclusion if—as he actually believes—the world and life itself, functions based on natural selection and random mutation…evolution and natural selection and this means that everything is meaningless—people's individual lives and life in general?

Just posted about the "Question Evolution!" campaign over at Examiner under the title, Do you question evolution?

The fact that simply mentioning considering questioning it will cause conniptions tell you a lot.

The Examiner article has all the info you can employ so as to get involved.

Due to be released on August 5, 2011 AD, the movie Rise of the Planet of the Apes is a prequel to both the classic Planet of the Apes.

This movie, or at least its PR campaign, hits upon a blind spot within pop-culture and how “science” is sold.

Note the description of the plot:

Roger Hicks wrote A Darwinian basis for citizen ethics which is a commentary on Citizen Ethics in a Time of Crisis published by The Guardian which takes the form of a “pamphlet with contributions by ‘prominent thinkers exploring key questions about ethics today.’”

He did a great job of exampling the circular logic of attempting to apply Darwinism where Darwinism does not belong.

Richard Dawkins stated that his new book The Greatest Show on Earth “is not intended as an antireligious book.” Well, considering that for him Darwinian evolution has always been about warding off God his intentionality came to naught as he simply could not help himself.

Considering that the book in expressed in atheistic evangelistic terms which run from “Evolutionary Theodicy” to the call to conversion to a “Grandeur View of Life” Dawkins has produced another anti-religious pro atheistic polemic.

I wrote two preemptive essays:

Unlike Francisco Ayala, I will not critique a book that I have not read; yes, he tends to do this as evidenced in “Signature in the Cell,” “Signature of Controversy” and the Signature of Pseudo-Scientific Sloth part 1 and part 3

Brother Marcus runs the only blog that I am sure to check on a daily basis: What Had Happen′ Was…..

As of late, he has been doing a series on FacePalming where, particularly, John Loftus has received enough FacePalms to leave a permanent mark.
Recently, Marcus wrote,

John J. May was due to publish a book titled, “The Origin of Specious Nonsense.” I know not of him nor his book but the fracas surrounding him and his book may be of interest.

John Horgan wrote:

Early in his career, the philosopher Karl Popper…called evolution via natural selection "almost a tautology" and "not a testable scientific theory but a metaphysical research program."
Attacked for these criticisms, Popper took them back.
But when I interviewed him in 1992, he blurted out that he still found Darwin's theory dissatisfying. "One ought to look for alternatives!"

This little ditty goes back to 1994 AD. yet, it was brought to mind recently as I thought about how atheists, essentially, define “atheism” as “anti-Christianity,” or “anti-theism” or “anti-…” pick your poison.

As long as they continue to do so, as long as their movement is premised upon a negative position; they will continue to be thought of as being negative and will, apparently quite gladly, continue to be negative.

Indeed, in 1994 AD George and Tina Rollason named their newborn daughter, “Atheist Evolution Rollason.”

A fascinating consideration of Charles Darwin as “rhetorical genius.”

You have to love the feisty self-important nature of a young student’s zeal without knowledge. Yes, they get a mere taste of freedom, abscond my good ol' mommy’s apron strings and after one or two classes are quite prepared to give the world what f'r.

[note: this essay was written in Oct. 2009 AD but is just now being re-posted from the blog in which it was originally posted]

A new chapter in the various tales of human evolution have begun being written on October 1, 2009 AD as an 18 year old fossil find has been brought to light.

What else could he do? He is bound by Darwinism to do so and so he does so.

At least celebrity atheists agree and are consistent.