As 2009 is coming to an end and as most people do my life responsibilities will be changing. Over that last year I have enjoyed engaging all my visitors on this debate of creation v Darwinian evolution, and I hope you all found some entertainment and education here as I have. Nothing lasts forever though.

My family has made some decisions on where we want to be at the end of 2010 and I am going to shifting my time to making those plans happen. All though I will still be on worpress and commenting on others posts and comments, I will not be adding new posts to this blog. I did not want to leave this blog without saying thank you to everyone that took time to comment on my posts, I sincerely appreciated your input.

The last thought I would like to leave you all with here is the one we all face this time of the year, Christmas. What does Christmas mean to you? I understand that some of you are not Christians and do not celebrate the religious ceremonies and/or traditions of this Holy season, but do you not celebrate the American holiday of Christmas? I grew up in a non religious family, probably more agnostic than atheistic but we just never talked about God, but we celebrate Christmas every year. It was a time to visit family , to catch up with what has been going on through out the year. Sure we saw them all year long, but Christmas was a time to remember all we had gone through the year previously and what we hope to accomplish the next year.

So take time to think about what you have been a part of in 2009, what are you most proud of and what would you like to change? In 2010 what would you like to accomplish? Now think of what it will take to accomplish those goals. Make the community you are a part of better.

Thank you, good night, and God bless.

After given things a lot of thought toward the motive of Darwinism I have come up with some observations. First I started with the questions: “Why do some people favor a belief in Darwinian Evolution (DE) over God?”.

The most obvious answer was that they wanted to avoid punishment for their actions. Most use DE as a way to lower the bar when it comes to being a good person, comparing their faults to those of a child killer makes them feel really good about themselves. So through DE they are able to convince themselves their is no judge over their action other than the community around them. This puts man in charge of morals.

This then led me to my next thought, “In the mind of a DEer man is the only thing that can intelligently design something.” You all know the line of questions, when you look at a painting you know there is a painter and when you look at a building you know there was a builder, but when a DEer looks at creation they do not see a creator because man can not duplicate it. So in their minds nature can only select what parts of creation it likes but it can not intelligently design an organism to adapt to its environment because the ability to design is reserved for man.

Side Note: Now I know that part of the argument can be torn down by saying that other creatures design tools or habitats so saying that intelligently designing things is reserved for mankind is too narrow and there for false. So let me clarify before the DE-Trolls jump in. These other creatures are almost always placed by traditional DEers, such as Darwin himself, as lower life forms. So it is ok for them to design lesser items but mans creations are always more sophisticated and advance.

Back to the original thought. This is now where we see the ego of DEers shows itself. They refuse to admit there maybe something beyond their knowledge that could be responsible for creating things that man is not capable of duplicating. They will play the game of “well prove it to me”, but when evidence is presented to them they inevitably close their eyes and say they don’t see any evidence.

Recently Ray Comfort and living waters ministry has been advertising the distribution of “On the origin of species” by Charles Darwin on 11/19/2009. Of course anything Ray Comfort is involved with Richard Dawkins and his clones have to attack. So they staged a coupe to get their hands on as many copies of this free book as they could get so that could limit it’s distribution, what where they afraid of? Ray Comfort’s introduction to the book.

A copy of the book, with the introduction, is available HERE. (I will try and keep this link a live as long as possible. If it is not working email me and I will email you the file.)

But then the “Banana-man” pulled a fast one, he handed out the books a day early. I guess Ray is not as dumb as Darwinist think. Well for your enjoyment I present Ray Comforts tribute to Richard “The Ape-man” Dawkins.

I would like to look at this statement we hear so often from Darwinists. Sometimes it goes like this:

“It is ok to say I don’t know the answer to a question (like the origin of existence) but don’t tell me you know the answer”

It is an illogical comment to say that sine you don’t know the answer that someone else does not know the correct answer. It is such an arrogant statement to make that since you don’t know something that it is not possible for someone else to have the answer.

If Darwinists thought about this they would have to agree that God is a possibility as an answer, oh no I dropped the g-bomb now the Darwinists will create a rabbit trail and go after my religious beliefs instead of staying the topic of logical debating. Before you can move on to the debate of whither God is the correct answer or not you must first decide if God is an option.

So here is your mission if you choose to accept it:

Is God an option? If not, why not?

Recently on Intelligent Design the Future Casey Luskin spoke about the Theory of Intelligent Design.

Click Here to download.

He brought up some good points that I found interesting. Give the show a listen and let me know what you think, and please leave your presuppositions at the door.

Recently I have taking on a discussion with, what I have encountered to be, a standard run of the mill Darwinist. His blog is at http://truelogic.wordpress.com/. It has been a consistent bob and weave by Mr Truelogic as I try to discuss with him the subject of his posts. He consistently brings up attacks on my beliefs and my standpoints  and never defends the points he tries to make in his posts. Then he made the following statement and it all became clear:

“1. You believe Jesus Christ was born to a virgin!
2. You believe Jesus Christ was resurrected from the dead!

Because you believe the above two points with ALL your heart and because NOTHING will cause you to believe otherwise, which is sound evidence demonstrating Science has nothing to do with your world/life view. That alone should cause intelligent people to pause and question the validity of anything you state and question your ability to be objective and honest.”

Something about this statement caused me to think about the state of the creation vs Darwinism debate. This statement shows why the debate has stalled. Too many Darwinists refused to listen to anything that apposes their belief in Darwinian evolution unless it comes from a Darwinist, do you see the problem with this?

It is intellectual dishonest to exclude someones ideas, thoughts or scientific research based on their religious beliefs. This is setting a standard that only allows your opinion to be confirmed and never challenged. How do we move past this and get the debate back on a productive path?

P.S. I will be addressing the quoted statement on truelogic’s post, feel free to join us if you have something to add.

I came across this article in the American Thinker web site from Ron Lipsman. He speaks about the liberal attitudes in academia and how Darwinian evolution is slowing scientific research. Check it out here.

If you want to discuss it below I would like to hear what you think of the article.

Recently the subject of Dr Behe’s irreducible complexity theory has been catching my attention again. Several people have brought it up and inevitably it leads to a mention of Ken Miller and the Dover trial.

In a September 23, 2005 article Kenneth Miller was quoted as saying:

“The logic of their argument is you have these multipart systems, and that the parts within them are useless on their own,” said Kenneth Miller

Here he sets up a straw man argument, it is the same one he continues to use today. Dr Behe claimed instead that the mechanism in question, lets take the infamous “bacterial flagellum”, would not work if any one part of its system was not present. This failure to function would then lead to a failure in the larger organism. If the flagellum did not have all of it’s parts it would not function and would have been discarded.

So the theory of irreducible complexity does not claim that a part of the mechanism could not be used somewhere else and I am surprised that someone with as much intelligence as Dr Miller would miss something so obvious, I would hope he did not do it on purpose.

I am always fascinated by the need of the Darwinian community to have the approval of their peers in order to justify their views. Many times in debates they fall back on the need for peer reviewed articles to measure the legitimacy of an idea. If you take this stand point, would you accept an article if it were published in a peer reviewed journal that allows articles on creation science or articles pointing to the legitimacy of Intelligent Design?

Does the publishing of articles that you do not agree with remove the authority of peer review from a journal? Who has to give their stamp of approval on a journal to give it the gold seal of legitimacy? Does it matter if an article is printed in a scientific journal if it is published in a book?

‘Intelligent design’ judge to speak at Bridgewater

Story from HERE

In recognition of Constitution Day, the Hon. John E. Jones III will speak on “Evolution, Intelligent Design and Religion in the School” at 7:30 p.m. Sept. 17, in Cole Hall at Bridgewater College.

I would love to see a transcript or video of his talk, I bet the odds are in favor of this being very interesting. I would recommend anyone that can attend, do so. If you do attend please email me your review of the event or a link to your recview if you post it some where else.

Thank you in advance.