On Testing Intelligent Design

Lydia McGrew, Ph.D. in English Literature, offers an interesting paper on how to test for intelligent design: Testability, Likelihoods, and Design.

 HT: Victor Reppert

Undesigned Coincidences in the Gospels

An interesting audio lecture by Timothy McGrew, professor of philosophy at Western Michigan University: Undesigned Coincidences in the Gospels.

What is Nanothermite? Could it Have Been Used to Demolish the WTC Skyscrapers?

Adam Taylor offers a nice introductory article on, What is Nanothermite? Could it Have Been Used to Demolish the WTC Skyscrapers?

I Probably Won't be Voting this Year.

I realize that democracy can only succeed if people are willing to compromise. But sometimes we find that we have certain principles or issues on which we cannot make ourselves compromise. I think that what is commonly known as "9/11 Truth" has become such an issue for me. I don't think I can in good conscience vote for a candidate who would not endorse a new, independent investigation into the events of 9/11.

I believe the evidence is overwhelming that the supposed terrorist acts of 9/11 were carried out under the auspices of people high up in our government. Maybe or maybe not George W. Bush or Richard Cheney. But almost certainly under the orders of high-ranking military officers.

I do not expect any major candidates to support such an investigation. So I doubt I will be voting for any candidate this year. I'll still vote for local issues, such as millage or bond proposals. But otherwise, I think I'll feel better abstaining from the usual political horse races taking place. Somehow they seem more meaningless to me now than ever before.

The Eternal Traffic Jam

For nearly two months now my drive home on the freeway during the late afternoon has been considerably slower than normal, thanks to the many gawkers who have the overwhelming desire to slow down and see how the latest road construction is coming along.  I feel confident that if they didn't satisfy their inner longing to know if more cement was poured since yesterday that traffic would flow along rather smoothly at about 45mph.  Instead, we crawl along at about 10mph, until right after the construction zone, when it suddenly occurs to drivers that there is nothing more to stare at out the side window.

While biding my time waiting for everyone in front of me to have their eyeful of the latest accomplishments of our faithful construction workers, I've conjured up what I consider to be the perfect Hell for gawkers.  Here's how it would work:

After a person dies, they wake up to find themselves in a car.  They are given the keys and told that once they start driving they will enter a highway that will take them straight to Heaven.  All they need to do is follow the directions on the signs.  And they are warned not to gawk at any accidents on the side of the road or they may miss the directions.  The person then begins driving, enters the highway, and immediately finds themselves in a traffic jam.  Everyone in front of them is driving very slowly in order to see the series of horrible traffic accidents along the side of the highway.  Each accident involves terribly twisted, mangled and bloodied bodies and limbs; each accident more gruesome than the one before it.  If the drivers would just avert their eyes from the gory scenes for a moment, they would see the signs that point them to the exit from the highway that would take them straight to Heaven.  Instead, each driver's attention is fixed on the delightful details of each crash.  And so the traffic inches along throughout eternity.  In my scenario, there are many exits to Heaven along the way.  But since the gawkers are too busy staring at the accidents, they never notice the signs.  The air conditioning in their cars doesn't work.  The heat is incredibly overbearing.  One would think that eventually they would tire and look for a way out.  But for some reason they just can't pull their gaze away long enough to notice how close they are to Paradise.

But then, maybe for them this is Paradise.

Respectable Expert accepts Young Earth Creationism

I've been skimming through the book Faith, Reason, and Earth History, by Leonard Brand, department chair of biology at Loma Linda University. On page 266 he offers lists of evidence supporting what he would call the competing theories of natural history, "Intervention and Catastrophism," versus "Megaevolution and Neocatastrophism."   His argument is that there is strong evidence for both theories, and that neither offers adequate explanations for the evidence that supports the other theory.

 As far as I can tell, Brand is considered a respectable scientist and expert in the fields that he is discussing.  This would be evidence to me that one could have reasonable doubt about an ancient Earth.  Conclusive evidence?  No.  But enough to reject James McGrath's sweeping accusation that ALL YECs are liars and deceivers.

Since I'm not a YEC, and since I don't have a passionate interest in trying to decide which view is correct (and according to Brand, the evidence is inconclusive, anyway), this is as far as I feel I need to go to discount McGrath's view.  Now back to things of more interest to me. 

"I Weep for the Future of Science."

Sorry, but I had to take a break from my YEC studies. For some reason I can't upload (download?) the video, but here's Sheldon's Introductory Lecture.