Darwin Endorsed Intelligent Design At One Time

Charles Darwin is credited for making evolution credible without the need of a creator God. There is a myth that Darwin repented of his views of God and evolution on his deathbed, but he died a self-proclaimed agnostic. Sadly Darwin admitted in his letters of a conviction of God’s existence in creation. From the book published by his son Francis Darwin, The Life and Letters of Charles Darwin, he stated,

"Formerly I was led by feelings […] to the firm conviction of the existence of God and of the immortality of the soul. […] I will remember my conviction that there is more in man than the mere breath of his body. But now the grandest scenes would not cause any such convictions and feelings to rise in my mind.”

Charles Darwin admitted that he held a view of an intelligent designer. By only considering natural options for life's origins he closed himself off to the notion of special creation. This inward compass Darwin had at one time focused his attention to the greatness of God. Scientific studies document observations at times through site, touch, hearing, and taste. Darwin admitted that there was an inward pull recognizing God.

Paul spoke in Romans about the existence of God being known to all. "For since the creation of the world His invisible attributes are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even His eternal power and Godhead, so that they are without excuse, because, although they knew God, they did not glorify Him as God, nor were thankful, but became futile in their thoughts, and their foolish hearts were darkened. Professing to be wise, they became fools." Romans 1:19-22. NKJV.

Clay Farris Naff: Rocks in our Heads

Intelligent Design is not Intelligent Preservation

 A response to Clay Farris Naff: Rocks in our Heads

It is amazing the number of people who write articles about intelligent design without a clue on what it teaches. Take for example Clay Farris Naff: Rocks in our Heads in the Huffington Post who posted a photo of stars and a asteroid.

Did God make the little red dot in this picture? If you buy intelligent design -- the idea the God, oops, sorry, an intelligent designer to be named at a later date, created everything in the universe with a plan for human life in mind -- well, you'd have to say yes.

Scientists that work in conjunction with the Discovery Group do not focus on intelligent preservation but intelligent design. Creationist on the other hand like those scientist working with the Institute of Creation Research, ICR, have an answer to the asteroid question.

But that little red dot cries out for explanation. It is an asteroid whose orbit more or less intersects with ours, one of countless near-earth objects that potentially threaten civilization. A newly launched satellite called WISE discovered it earlier this month.

I do not have the habit of listening to asteroids as they pass by Earth. It goes without saying that their is obvious evidence of asteroids hitting the Earth and Moon. What does the existence of asteroid impacts have anything to so with intelligent design? It does not. Blogs like this Huffington Post article create a straw man argument for dismissing the study of intelligent design. Intelligent design does not suggest anything regarding preservation of life, just the existence.

Then ask yourself, why have we been so lucky? This is one of those places where science and religion intersect. You might be tempted to picture the hand of God swatting away killer asteroids to keep his favorite creatures safe. But why, we have to ask, would God need to do that? If he custom-built the universe, why didn't he simply make a cleaner job of it?

Most Scientists who advocate either intelligent design or evolution do not ask the question of Why? Religion takes information from scientists and then asks the question why. The Christian religion which is based on the Bible has an answer for why is there chaos. Sin. When sin entered the universe then humanity began to suffer. In Christian theology not only is their a need for humanity to be redeemed, but the universe as well.

For the creation was subjected to frustration, not by its own choice, but by the will of the one who subjected it, in hope that the creation itself will be liberated from its bondage to decay and brought into the glorious freedom of the children of God. We know that the whole creation has been groaning as in the pains of childbirth right up to the present time. (Rom 8:20-22) NIV

When Adam and Eve sinned a chaos entered the world. They did not have the same physical benefits of longevity of life. Conservative theology teaches that humanity would experience suffering because of this sin. The Bible is primarly a book about redemption. Not only do humans need to be redeemed, there is scripture that tells of the universe needing to be changed.

The Lord is not slack concerning His promise, as some count slackness, but is longsuffering toward us, not willing that any should perish but that all should come to repentance. But the day of the Lord will come as a thief in the night, in which the heavens will pass away with a great noise, and the elements will melt with fervent heat; both the earth and the works that are in it will be burned up. (2Pe 3:9-10) NKJV

While their are certainly qualities of life that preserve life, it does not meet the original plan of God. Storms, earthquakes and even asteroid impacts are evidence that the universe is chaotic. While questions remain of why their are tragic losses of human lives due to nature, the Bible is clear that this world needs to be changed.

Have it your way ... or God's way

Norman Rockwell's Creation of The Ideal

The Bible indicates that we are created in the image of God. If this is true then we will have similar aspects on a different level. For example in the Bible we read that humans are created disticntly from the animals and plants. Humans were given the abilty to think and express that thinking.

North America has Norman Rockwell recreated it, is only an ideal of the past. Family togetherness is realized by social scientists today as ideal. Then why is their not a concerted effort to reach back to this ideal? Why is the search for life on Mars a higher priority than working on family relationships?

When evolution teachings are promoted than morals are compromised eventually. Evolution teaches a selfish philosophy of look at the world for your limited time only.

Burger King's  Have it Your Way

Evolution philosophy erodes God's plan for an ideal life. Culture is just an evolved entity. The slogan for Burger King is Have It Your Way. Beer Commericals speak of the ideal life of the individual and not of family relationships. Political focus is on the almighty dollar. With all of this said...The Bible gives guidance for an ideal family life. But this is ignored.

When those who promote the idea of Intelligent Design or Biblical creation it is because of faith in God's word and present reality. Like produces like. An orange tree produces oranges for other orange trees to grow. Evolution philosophy ignores this common reality and also the reality of moral values declining. If we are to see true success in North America it is not in promoting evolution but the reality of the world around us. This reality involves morals and God's word has answers for ailing morals.

The Special Creation of Protozoans

Yet Another Insignificant Attack on Intelligent Design. From:
Even a Protozoan does not believe in intelligent design | Science news | TechEye - All the technology news unfit for print

According to the Journal of Eukaryotic Microbiology, which we get for the Spot the Amoeba competition, protozoans do not need a creator to have existed.

Intelligent Design theorists claim that the Cambrian explosion 545 million years ago cannot be explained by Darwinian evolution – because it happened too fast.

Is their not something obnoxious with this statement? How could empirical science suggest protozoa evolved? It cannot. Not every scientist who embraces ID are against evolution totally. But for the sake of the argument lets maintain the writer is not giving a non-truth.

Another ID argument that Protozoans disprove is that no one has ever seen the development of a new species.

However Farmer and Habura have seen a case where amoebae became symbiotically dependent upon infecting bacteria. If the symbotically dependent amoebae subsequently tried to interbreed with the parent stock, the parent stock died of the bacterial infection. Thus the two became genetically isolated.

This is the same old argument for evolution that has been used over the decades. Those that disagree with evolution do not discount that genetic changes do take place. This is common Mendelian Genetics at work. The distinct genetic populations do not show an increase in genomic information, but a loss.

Lastly the ID argument that that the fossil record does not show transitional species do not apply to protozoans as there is a detailed fossil record of protists does exhibit just such intermediate forms.

Once again different species of protozoa in a fossil does not declare evolution any more than fossils of dog and a horse in the same rock layer.

Looks like a protozoa can make a monkey out of intelligent design theory.

ummmm I don't think so.

This is a test.

No Intelligence Allowed is now available on DVD in the United Kingdom

Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed  












 
now available on DVD in the United Kingdom in a newly expanded edition with 44 minutes of never-before-seen interviews.

Interest in intelligent design is growing in Britain. Earlier this month, Stephen Meyer, who appears in Expelled, defended both the film and ID in a debate with atheist Peter Atkins, which you can listen to here.

The "Bad Boy UK Version" promises to be a hit in a market that has been dominated by the likes of Richard Dawkins, whose appearance in the film and startling admission that intelligent design exists — coming from aliens, of course — might raise a few eyebrows in his native land.

What's the old saying about prophets and honor in their homeland?

 From Discovery Institute.
http://www.evolutionnews.org/2010/01/expelled_now_available_in_the.html

When Creationism and The Origin of Species Mix

Modified Charles Darwin's Origin of Species
50,000 plus copies to be distrubuted on university campuses

Father Cantalamessa and Biblical Creation

From Catholicnews.com
Papal preacher says intelligent design is truth of faith, not science. By Cindy Wooden. Catholic News Service.Mar-13-2009

While some proponents of intelligent design claim that it is a scientifically valid theory, most scientists dismiss it as pseudoscience.The arguments, Father Cantalamessa said, are due to the fact that, "in my opinion, there is not a clear enough distinction between intelligent design is due mainly to a confusion between scientific theory and the truths of faith.

The Bible makes statements that have scientific implications. When the Bible says "in the begininig God created" there is an undeniable first cause insisted. Evolution science (sic) suggests that all things seen are the result of chance. Even when one focuses upon biological evolution there will always be a focus upon inorganic evolution.

Those that advocate a belief in the Bible and macro evolution cannot find congruency. Father Cantalamessa is incorrect in his article to deny the Bible's explicit doctrine of special creation. It is interesting that he would focus on Paul's writing to the Romans regarding physical properties taking place now.

Father Cantalamessa's Lenten reflection focused on a verse from St. Paul's Letter to the Romans: "All creation is groaning in labor pains even until now."
The text, he said, is an indication that St. Paul believes that the entire cosmos -- not just humanity -- is waiting to be saved and restored to its original beauty by Christ.

Father Cantalamessa made a scientific statement quoting Paul's letters. Everything is waiting to be restored to an original beauty. Evolution suggests that all life came from a primordial pool of ooze. Is this the original beauty that we should look forward to? I think another passage of Paul's writing to Romans should be examined.

For since the creation of the world His invisible attributes are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even His eternal power and Godhead, so that they are without excuse.Romans 1:20.

Macro evolution when taken to it's conclusion denies the existence of God. Those that follow it's teachings are forced to deny what is clearly revealed to their conscious.

Obama Chooses to Kill Unborn Babies

While most of the country is worried about thier own nickles and dimes, President Barak Obama has chosen to allow funding for embryonic stem cell research. An embryo is an unborn human. By endorsing research into the lives of unborn children, the value of life is deminished. The psalmist wrote:

My flesh was made by you, and my parts joined together in my mother's body. Psa 139:13

Obama is allowing our tax money to be spent destroying the gift of life granted to every unborn child. Evolution philsophy has shown in it's grotesque nature in ignoring the gift of God. Below is an action alert email from the American Family Association. Visit http://www.afa.net/. for more information.


----------------------------------
Please help us get this information into the hands of as many people as possible by forwarding it to your entire e-mail list of family and friends.

Obama OKs embryonic stem cell research; actions are immoral and ineffective
March 10, 2009

Dear Nancy,

President Obama has given the ok to destroy human life in the name of scientific research.Embryonic stem cell research is immoral and ineffective. It is immoral because it destroys human life at its earliest stage of development by harvesting the stem cells for body parts. It is ineffective because it has yet to be used a single time in any therapeutic application.Researchers must get their funding from taxpayers for embryonic stem cell research because they can't convince private sources to invest. Private investors know there are no proven uses for embryonic stem cells. It's all hype, hope and theory.But adult stem cell research, on the other hand, is ethically benign and is already being used to treat over 70 diseases and conditions. If taxpayer dollars are going to be spent on stem cell research, that's where it ought to go.By reversing funding restrictions on embryonic stem cell research, Pres. Obama is making every American taxpayer complicit in immoral, life destroying research. This is a terrible example of political ideology trumping sound science.

Take Action!
Send an e-mail to President Obama telling him you are disappointed in his decision to allow the destruction of human life.

California High Court Reviews Gay Marriage Ban. Response

Once again there is a promotion of same-sex marriages in California. The battle is ever raging against God's original created design of man and a woman. California High Court Reviews Gay Marriage Ban. Thursday, March 05, 2009.

SAN FRANCISCO — Same-sex marriage advocates are pinning their hopes on California's highest court as it prepares to hear arguments on a trio of lawsuits seeking to overturn the state's voter-approved ban on gay unions.

The promotion of evolution has assisted in creating a societal climate against God's creative purpose of marriage. Cultures have never embraced same-sex marriages publiclly. Why? Because it is an innate understanding that marriage is between males and females. Jesus endorsed the purpose of marriage as being between a man and a woman. Jesus said:

. . .Have ye not read, that he which made them at the beginning made them male and female,And said, For this cause shall a man leave father and mother, and shall cleave to his wife: and they twain shall be one flesh? (Matthew 19:5-6)

How does evolution philosophy contribute to same-sex marriage proponents ? Evolution promotes that species have choices to make regarding their environment as they see fit. If their is no moral guidelines in life than homosexuality is a choice based against the moral codes of civilizations past and present and more importantly God himself.

Charles Darwin and Worm Research

I have been reading on the life of Darwin and noticed that discussion is given to Darwin's publication about earthworms. "The Formation of Vegetable Mould Through the Action of Worms, With Observations on Their Habits, published in 1881, sold even better than On the Origin of Species during Darwin's lifetime."

It is interesting that NPR in mentioning this trivia point did not refer to a similar work published almost 100 years earlier. The Natural History and Antiquities of Selborne. Published by Gilbert White. (18 July 1720 – 26 June 1793) White was a pioneering naturalist and ornithologist.who wrote about the significance of earthworms.

Earthworms, though in appearance a small and despicable link in the chain of nature, yet, if lost, would make a lamentable chasm [...] worms seem to be the great promoters of vegetation, which would proceed but lamely without them...

Some scholars think Darwin was the first major observer of the benefit of earthworms. in NPR.org's article Darwin's Earthworm Experiments Broke New Ground.by Joe Palca we read:

"At the time when Darwin started looking at the worms, no one appreciated the role they had in agriculture," says Alun Anderson, a journalist who became interested in Darwin's worm work.In fact, Anderson says, in the mid 19th century, most people thought earthworms were pests.

Could it be that because White was a Christian clergyman who held a bias in creationism, his work is ignored? I think so.

Lecture on Charles Darwin by John Martin March 9

At the monthly meeting of the Missouri Association of Creation (MAC) I will be delivering a lecture on Charles Darwin and the Christian Compromise. March 9th, 2009 at 7:30 p.m. For directions to this event please visit http://www.gennet.org/

Please bookmark this blog or register to receive updates.

Obama Chooses Abortion Advocate Kathleen Sebelius

Evolution materialistic philosophy supports the choice of abortion. The undesirable are eliminated in the struggle for Darwinian evolution to occur.

Today President Barak Obama appointed Kathleen Sebelius for Secretary of Health and Human Services. She just happens to be in the midst of abortion controversy. "As governor, Sebelius saw the abortion rate decline 8.5 percent in Kansas between 2002 and 2007, according to the state's health department." So why are people upset at her?

Kansas-based Operation Rescue said it would launch a full-out campaign against Sebelius because, as governor, she has had the support of Dr. George Tiller, who has been indicted for allegedly performing late-term abortions on underage girls.

The Catholic League "notes on its Web site that the Roman Catholic governor's 'support for abortion is so far off-the-charts that she has been publicly criticized by the last three archbishops of Kansas City.'"

What will happen to America's abortion policies in the next four years? Focus on Kathleen Sebelius.

Information for this post came from: Anti-Abortion Activists Plan to Fight Sebelius' Nomination for HHS. Monday, March 02, 2009.
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/first100days/2009/03/02/sebelius-positions-abortion/

Were the Apolo 8 Astronauts Stupid Creationists?

Here is the Apollo 8 Mission's reading from a portion of Genesis 1. It is interesting that Christianity and specifically Creation is brought out in their mission. There is a criticism of Creationism that states that by promoting it in our schools we are promoting ignorance in overall education. These critics forget that foundations of modern science were established because of Christianity. Even the philosophy of atheism has it's roots in Christianity in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries.

The rigorous training of an astronaut not only involves physical fitness but also multiple intelligences. Understanding of physics, computer systems, astronomy, meteorology, or just some of the studies needed in understanding space flight. Emotional fitness is critical as well and isn't it interesting that Apollo 8 astronauts advocated creationism? I think this is another think worth mentioning in public schools.

ID Should be Taught in America's Science Classrooms

This blog post is a response to Commentary: Where does intelligent design fit in at school?
David Prejean • February 18, 2009

No academic discipline is an island to itself. What academic disciplines are needed to understand science? Of course one must know how to read and write to understand science on a basic cognitive level. This is not debatable, however in public schools in America, there are thousands of children who sit in science classrooms and are illiterate. One must know how to read and write to understand science.

To understand biology, one must understand chemistry. To understand chemistry one must understand algebra. Today there are thousands of high school students who are severely deficient in understanding biology because of poor math skills. We must emphasize math for students to understand science.

To understand biology sufficiently one needs to know history of biology. If future discoveries in science are to happen than anchors of previous discoveries must be understood. Biases of scientists past and present are important to understand how conclusions were made. The beginning of modern science was founded upon intelligent design as a bias. The lives of John Newton, Francis Bacon, Charles Lyell, William Buckland and hundreds of other scientists held the similar bias of beleving that God created everything. Religious bias did not hinder these men in their pursuit of emperical truth it only enhanced it.

In addition to reading, writing, math, history, brought into the classroom, controversy should be addressed as well. What better way to understand a precept then to have its antithesis presented. By contrasting ID and evolution, one will understand far better than if opposing viewpoints held by scientists who advocate ID are ignored.

North Dakota House Gives Fertilized Eggs Human Status

The measure that would make it all but impossible to get an abortion in the state now goes to the North Dakota Senate after the state House.http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/02/18/north-dakota-house-gives-fertilized-eggs-human-status/

Fox News reported this February 18.

The bill declares that "any organism with the genome of homo sapiens" is a person protected by rights granted by the North Dakota Constitution and state laws.

The measure's sponsor, Rep. Dan Ruby, R-Minot, said the legislation did not automatically ban abortion. Ruby has introduced bills in previous sessions of the Legislature to prohibit abortion in North Dakota.

Hopefully the North Dakota senate will pass this bill to endorse the value of life. I do not know how it is worded, but hopefully it will not be caught in legal arguments of liability. For example, because a woman has a spontaneous abortion, would a police report have to be filled out?

This is another example where intelligent design could be promoted in public schools. Discussion of issues like this in civics, sociology, and biology could be addressed. Evolution philosophy biases against this bill could be discussed in encouraging critical thinking skills.

La Brea Tar Pit scientists declare new discoveries

Old News is New News

The discovery took place in 2006 and the news was made then. Remains of thousands of critters were discovered in a new area of the famous La Brea tar pits. After work was beun in an area once occupied by a parking lot. Here is what the AP states.

Among the finds is a near-intact mammoth skeleton and bones of saber-toothed cats, dire wolves, bisons, horses, ground sloths and other mammals.

Researchers discovered 16 fossil deposits under an old parking lot next to the tar pits in 2006 and began sifting through them last summer.

Officials of the Page Museum at the tar pits plan to formally announce their findings on Wednesday. The discoveries could double the museum's Ice Age collection.

This is an example of old news being new news. Why is it submitted again to the main stream media? Obviously there is a need for funding. Money is motivating factor of this news story just as the recent story of methane on Mars story. The museum at La Brea and the folks of NASA have the same agenda - get money by announcing old news again.

When examining other discoveries relating to evolution you will notice a similar agenda in news releases. Does these news stories minimize the reliability of the discoveries? Perhaps not, but one must asks questions relating to perceptions. Perceptions can be the difference between subjective inquiry versus objective observations.

Galaxy has 'billions of Earths' Response

Star Trek or should I say Planet Trek is starting from March 7th, when the Kepler Mission will be launched. The photo on this blog shows the Cygnus Region of where the Kepler telescope will focus.

The claim has been made that 100 billion earth like planets are yet to be discovered. In the past 15 years there has been 300 planets identified outside of our solar system. Here is what the news from BBC on Feb 15, 2009 says."

Galaxy has 'billions of Earths'

The number of stars points to there being many rocky planets. Dr Alan Boss of the Carnegie Institution of Science said many of these worlds could be inhabited by simple lifeforms.

Dr Boss estimates that Nasa's Kepler mission, due for launch in March, should begin finding some of these Earth-like planets within the next few years.

The next logical leap using evolutionary assumptions is to suggest that their are numerous civilized planets.

Recent work at Edinburgh University tried to quantify how many intelligent civilisations might be out there. The research suggested there could be thousands of them.

Is this science or science fiction? Is a belief in aliens a belief that is preferred to be discussed in public schools? Why then are people making such a fuss of intelligent design being taught? ID is open to the suggestion that life on earth came about from outside of our solar system. Is this not information that the Kepler Mission is open to receiving? I say let ID be taught along with the Kepler Mission.

Evolution Weekend is Here

US churches to discuss evolution vs creation. By DIONNE WALKER, Associated Press Writer Dionne Walker, Associated Press Writer – Fri Feb 13, 8:30 pm ET

"We have to give God a lot more credit than we give him now — we need to give him the benefit of the doubt that his word includes evolution," said Mike Ghouse, president of the World Muslim Congress, a Dallas-based union of 3,000 Muslims that hosted its first ever Evolution Weekend discussion Friday.

The evolution vs. creation debate has simmered for at least the last 150 years since Darwin's "On the Origin of Species." That volume first suggested populations evolve over generations through a process of natural selection.

The second weekend of February every year is deemed evolution weekend by liberal Christians, Jews and now Muslims. Initially, Evolution Sunday was the name given to this special event. Those that espouse this view have ignored the Bible that special creation of the world took place, including inorganic and organic evolution. Over 950 churches signed an online petition that they would teach evolution as God's mechanism for everything to come to be.

Now some Muslims are questioning divine creationism.

If the Bible's view of origins is disputed than, doctrines of salvation, Heaven, Hell and Jesus are also in question. The devil first deceived humans by questioning the authority of God's word.

Now the serpent was more cunning than any beast of the field which the Lord God had made. And he said to the woman, "Has God indeed said, 'You shall not eat of every tree of the garden'?"Genesis 3:1

How have others today ignored the word of God because of doubt. Evolution Weekend is a serpent in the tree confusing Christianity.

Academic Freedom Day is Today February 12, 2009

Happy Academic Freedom Day!

Information about the 200th birthday of Darwin is found all around the world today. Here are three of the most prominent creation and ID websites and what they are posting on Darwin Day and Academic Freedom Day.


Answers In Genesis. Answers in Genesis is a young earth creationist organization lead by Ken Ham. Institute of Creation Research,

Darwin and Lincoln: The Race Connection

Exactly 200 years ago today, two very famous people were born. Both men greatly impacted the world, but their legacies were quite different.

Institute Creation Research. February Acts and Facts. By Henry Morris III, D.Min.ICR is one of the oldest and most renowned organization of scientists who advocate young earth creationism.

Darwin's Dangerous Doctrine

Morris speaks about the growing compromise among Evangelical leaders to accept evolution


Discovery Institute has several articles including:

Darwin's Birth Day. By: Geoffrey Simmons. Amazon.com. February 11, 2009

Had Charles Darwin been able to witness his own gestation period, might he have changed his mind about the evolution of mankind? Assuming that he was an honest and keen observer of nature--and the evidence suggests that he was--the answer is a resounding yes. He essentially said so in 1872 when he wrote:

“If it could be demonstrated that any complex organ existed which could not possibly have been formed by numerous, successive slight modifications, my theory would ultimately breakdown.”

Discovery Institute is the world's best known intelligent design, ID, organization.

Vatican conference will give intelligent design critical study

News of the Vatican Conference on Evolution has been mentioned for some months now. It will be in March. What is new is the openness to examine intelligent design. Most Catholic theologians including the present pope, suggests that God used evolution for everything to occur.

The following information is from "Vatican conference will give intelligent design critical study. By Carol Glatz. Catholic News Service."

VATICAN CITY (CNS) -- An upcoming Vatican-sponsored conference on evolution will include critical study of the theory of intelligent design, which, organizers said, represents poor theology and science.

While proponents of intelligent design were not invited to give presentations at the March 3-7 international conference, organizers agreed to discuss how it appeared and developed as a cultural ideology, not as science.

Why were ID scientists not allowed to express their views? The criticism is that ID developed as a cultural ideology is not true. Scientists of the 18th and 19th centuries held creationism ideas.

This sentence is really interesting:

The conference will look at "a correct exegesis" of biblical accounts of creation, said Father Leclerc.

The error of this statement is that the word exegesis should be substituted for eisegeis. When one imposes their own presupposition on the Bible, then this is the opposite of exegesis.