Latest Challenges to the Teaching of Evolution

“All of you attending this lecture tonight have just demonstrated the Darwinian principle of survival of the swiftest,” said Donald Furst, professor of art at the University of North Carolina Wilmington.

In the natural world, Behe gives the examples of bacterial flagellum and the cell. He says that because the flagellum and cell are complex minute biological machines, they couldn’t have evolved on their own through gradual change over millions of years with natural selection.

In short, Behe says much of life is too complex to be explained by random mutations.

Ask someone with intelligence what ci's post about "brainwashing" and kids being like their parents actually means to him. If he doesn't tell you that it's an ignorant, uneducated blurt he is not intelligent.

When the child is at the mercy of his/her parent to teach them about facts, evidence, and common sense, they instead learn about miracles, and some cockamamie god creating earth in seven days.

Who does ci. want the kids to be like? What does he mean by "like"?

I have dwelt thus long upon this topic because the debate between the Cambridge Platonists and Hobbes has more than an antiquarian interest; it is the seventeenth century version of the unending debate between belief and unbelief. It was necessary to refure Hobbes, because in him "the new philosophy" had most clearly shown its hand--or rather its cloven hoof. Here was philosophy not only broken loose from its immemorial alliance with theology, but actually challenging and undermining all the traditional assumptions of religion and ethics. The threat from this direction seemed to the Cambridge Platonists all the more alarming because of the fearful disunity of Chrisendom at that time. The rival creeds, confessions, sects and church politics were so fanatically engrossed in inter-nicene conflicts that they hardly noticed the real, the awful danger threatening them all alike. Behind the smokescreen of controversy the diabolical philosopher was preparing an atomic ( I should perhaps calli it a 'corpuscular') bomb, which would blow them all, and religion itself, to smithereens. Could not something be done before it was too late? The Platonists believed that something could be done, and they believed that the thing to do was to enlist philosophy on the side of the angels instead of allowing it to secede to the devil's party. Show that religion is indeed philosophical, show that Reason is the organ of spiritual vision, and you will at once unite the brawling sects and defeat the atheistic aggressor.

All Behe & Co have to do is make their case "plausible". And keep on and on without losing heart which they won't. People want to believe

Therefore, in the eyes of the angels, any deceit is preferred if it is in the case of the Lord. Truth only need be demanded in the secular world.

I have no distaste for science either. It is the closet Christians such as yourself who manipulate the subject without any knowledge of it who I find to be a bit distasteful.

Nobody with a proper scientific cast of mind would write in their own language in the manner you have displayed there.

You are perfectly free to assume anything you like.