9781433552861.Pdf
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Load more
Recommended publications
-
Understanding the Intelligent Design Creationist Movement: Its True Nature and Goals
UNDERSTANDING THE INTELLIGENT DESIGN CREATIONIST MOVEMENT: ITS TRUE NATURE AND GOALS A POSITION PAPER FROM THE CENTER FOR INQUIRY OFFICE OF PUBLIC POLICY AUTHOR: BARBARA FORREST, Ph.D. Reviewing Committee: Paul Kurtz, Ph.D.; Austin Dacey, Ph.D.; Stuart D. Jordan, Ph.D.; Ronald A. Lindsay, J. D., Ph.D.; John Shook, Ph.D.; Toni Van Pelt DATED: MAY 2007 ( AMENDED JULY 2007) Copyright © 2007 Center for Inquiry, Inc. Permission is granted for this material to be shared for noncommercial, educational purposes, provided that this notice appears on the reproduced materials, the full authoritative version is retained, and copies are not altered. To disseminate otherwise or to republish requires written permission from the Center for Inquiry, Inc. Table of Contents Section I. Introduction: What is at stake in the dispute over intelligent design?.................. 1 Section II. What is the intelligent design creationist movement? ........................................ 2 Section III. The historical and legal background of intelligent design creationism ................ 6 Epperson v. Arkansas (1968) ............................................................................ 6 McLean v. Arkansas (1982) .............................................................................. 6 Edwards v. Aguillard (1987) ............................................................................. 7 Section IV. The ID movement’s aims and strategy .............................................................. 9 The “Wedge Strategy” ..................................................................................... -
Discussion & Study Guide
DISCUSSION & STUDY GUIDE By Ryan Huxley COURTESY OF Table of Contents Introduction ..................................................................................................................................... 3 Chapter 1: The Cambrian Explosion............................................................................................... 4 Chapter 2: Darwin’s Dilemma ........................................................................................................ 7 Chapter 3: Chinese Fossils ............................................................................................................ 11 Chapter 4: The Phyla .................................................................................................................... 16 Chapter 5: Biological Information ................................................................................................ 19 Answers......................................................................................................................................... 25 Chapter 1: The Cambrian Explosion..................................................................................... 25 Chapter 2: Darwin’s Dilemma .............................................................................................. 27 Chapter 3: Chinese Fossils .................................................................................................... 30 Chapter 4: The Phyla ............................................................................................................ 35 Chapter -
Scientists Dissent List
A SCIENTIFIC DISSENT FROM DARWINISM “We are skeptical of claims for the ability of random mutation and natural selection to account for the complexity of life. Careful examination of the evidence for Darwinian theory should be encouraged.” This was last publicly updated February 2019. Scientists listed by doctoral degree or current position. Philip Skell* Emeritus, Evan Pugh Prof. of Chemistry, Pennsylvania State University Member of the National Academy of Sciences Lyle H. Jensen* Professor Emeritus, Dept. of Biological Structure & Dept. of Biochemistry University of Washington, Fellow AAAS Maciej Giertych Full Professor, Institute of Dendrology Polish Academy of Sciences Lev Beloussov Prof. of Embryology, Honorary Prof., Moscow State University Member, Russian Academy of Natural Sciences Eugene Buff Ph.D. Genetics Institute of Developmental Biology, Russian Academy of Sciences Emil Palecek Prof. of Molecular Biology, Masaryk University; Leading Scientist Inst. of Biophysics, Academy of Sci., Czech Republic K. Mosto Onuoha Shell Professor of Geology & Deputy Vice-Chancellor, Univ. of Nigeria Fellow, Nigerian Academy of Science Ferenc Jeszenszky Former Head of the Center of Research Groups Hungarian Academy of Sciences M.M. Ninan Former President Hindustan Academy of Science, Bangalore University (India) Denis Fesenko Junior Research Fellow, Engelhardt Institute of Molecular Biology Russian Academy of Sciences (Russia) Sergey I. Vdovenko Senior Research Assistant, Department of Fine Organic Synthesis Institute of Bioorganic Chemistry and Petrochemistry Ukrainian National Academy of Sciences (Ukraine) Henry Schaefer Director, Center for Computational Quantum Chemistry University of Georgia Paul Ashby Ph.D. Chemistry Harvard University Israel Hanukoglu Professor of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology Chairman The College of Judea and Samaria (Israel) Alan Linton Emeritus Professor of Bacteriology University of Bristol (UK) Dean Kenyon Emeritus Professor of Biology San Francisco State University David W. -
Excelling in Your Career As a Believer in Jesus Christ
Practicing Science While Believing and Acting Upon the Scriptures James M. Tour Rice University www.jmtour.com The blessing of the family Nanotechnology—James Tour, www.jmtour.com 1. Treatment of TBI and stroke with carbon nanoparticles. 2. Healing of spinal cords with graphene nanoribbons. 3. “Tattoo therapy” with carbon nanoparticles to alleviate autoimmune disease. NH H2N N 4. Drug delivery with carbon HN O O NH O HO HN O O nanoparticles. NH 2 NH O HN O OH NH O S N N HN N3 N OH Me O S 1 cm Laminectomy and complete transection of cervical spinal cord at C5. Then application of 1 wt% pegylated-graphene nanoribbons (PEG-GNR or “Texas PEG”) in (polyethylene glycol)-600. Shown is the rat mobility at 7, 14 and 21 days post surgery. Making the lame walk, the blind see, the deaf hear, and the poor have the gospel preached to them. 4 Is there a prescription for thriving? Psalm 1: 1-3 How blessed is the man who does not walk in the counsel of the wicked, nor stand in the path of sinners, nor sit in the seat of scoffers! But his delight is in the law of the Lord, and in His law he meditates day and night. He will be like a tree firmly planted by streams of water, which yields its fruit in its season, and its leaf does not wither, and in whatever he does, he prospers. Is there a prescription for thriving? Joshua 1:8 This book of the law shall not depart from your mouth, but you shall meditate on it day and night, so that you may be careful to do according to all that is written in it; for then you will make your way prosperous, and then you will have success. -
Alleged Scientific Opposition to Evolution
Evolution Features Alleged scientific opposition to evolution Nick Matzke (University of California, Berkeley) Biological evolution — descent with modification — became generally accept- from chemical precursors through chemical laws. Explore Evo- ed in the scientific community in the same fashion as all other major theories, lution blithely cites Schwabe as if this bizarre view was a serious i.e. it survived repeated testing against research data. Creationists, especially contender in the scientific community. Schwabe’s most surpris- creationists who support the notion of ‘intelligent design’, are so desperate for ing molecular incongruency was his finding of pig relaxin in this kind of secular credibility that they will trumpet any quote, citation, or scien- tunicates, but this finding has not been replicated in the Ciona tist that can be interpreted or misinterpreted as authoritative dissent from the genome and thus was probably due to contamination. Michael mainstream evolutionary theory. This occurs whether or not the cited authority Denton’s 1985 book Evolution: A Theory in Crisis assembled is actually dissenting, or is actually an authority. In an almost automaton-like quote-mines and misunderstandings in support of the conten- Downloaded from http://portlandpress.com/biochemist/article-pdf/31/1/23/4256/bio031010023.pdf by guest on 25 September 2021 fashion, creationists compile collections of such ‘authorities’ and deploy them in tion that evolution was about to collapse and be replaced by a an attempt to convince school boards, teachers, students, and eventually judges typological view of biology. For example, Denton thought that that there is scientific ‘controversy’ over evolution. on evolutionary theory, frog sequences should be intermediate between fish and mammal sequences, not realizing that living The most spectacular recent example is a 2007 supplemental textbook for high-school biology fish have been evolving for just as long as living frogs and mam- classes, misleadingly entitled Explore Evolution: the Arguments for and Against Neo-Darwinism. -
The Moody Center for the Arts Opens to the Public
THE MOODY CENTER FOR THE ARTS OPENS TO THE PUBLIC WITH A DEDICATION CEREMONY, CUTTING-EDGE EXHIBITIONS, PREMIERE PERFORMANCES AND FREE PARTIES FOR HOUSTON AND THE RICE UNIVERSITY COMMUNITY The Moody Center for the Arts at Rice University, Houston, TX. Michael Maltzan Architecture. Photo: Nash Baker HOUSTON, TX — February 23, 2017 — Houston’s new, internationally-focused arts institution, the Moody Center for the Arts at Rice University, built for creating collaborative works of all kinds and presenting innovative, transdisciplinary experiences, will open to the public on Friday, February 24, 2017, with five cutting-edge art exhibitions, one world-premiere dance performance developed on- site and four days of celebratory events for Rice University and local communities. Designed by renowned architect Michael Maltzan, the Moody offers a new meeting place of the arts, humanities and sciences, and of the public and the academic world, with exhibition spaces open and free to all. OPENING THE MOODY Friday, February 24 - Ribbon-Cutting and Opening Reception, 4pm The weekend celebrations will begin at 4pm on Friday, February 24 with a ribbon-cutting ceremony led by Alison Weaver, Suzanne Deal Booth Executive Director of the Moody. Ross Moody, Trustee of The Moody Foundation, will be present to accept thanks for providing lead funding for the 50,000-square- foot, $30 million building. Also in attendance will be other Houston civic officials, university and cultural leaders, architect Michael Maltzan and internationally acclaimed photographer Thomas Struth, one of the artists featured in the Moody’s inaugural exhibitions. Friday, February 24 – Free Public Opening Celebration, 7-10pm The festivities continue after the ribbon-cutting with a joyous opening party, free to all, from 7 to 10pm, featuring live music by The Tontons, food trucks and opportunities to view the exhibitions. -
Brochur Weebit Inter 2.Pdf
What is Weebit? Patent Protection Weebit was incorporated in Israel in 2014. It has been built around a revolutionary Weebit has secured 7 global patents to commercially protect James Tour’s advancements in memory technology. memory and semiconductor technology invented by Professor James Tour of Rice University in Houston, Texas. James Tour is a world-renowned leader in the field of materials engineering and nanotechnology, and retains the position of Chief Scientific Advisor. PCT/US2012/025435 Weebit is developing Tour’s new silicon oxide (SiOx) Resistive Random Access Memory “SiOx Based Invisible / US Pat. 8,390,326 (ReRAM) technology, and will be able to show a commercially viable product within 18 months. Transparent Nonvolatile Memory” “Method for Fabrication of This quantum leap will allow semiconductor memory elements to become cheaper, faster, a Semiconductor Element....” more reliable and more energy efficient than the existing Flash technology. US Pat. 7,973,559 “Non Charged Based Two Terminal... The Problem Resistive Switching Cells” US Pat. 8,592,791 Global data storage requirements are growing exponentially, doubling every two years. “Silicon Oxide Based Memristive Device” Moore’s Law observes that the number of transistors in dense integrated circuits doubles approximately every two years. However, Moore’s Law will soon become untenable in the field of data storage due to Flash technology reaching its scaling limits. With the explosion PCT/US2014/066303 of Internet of Things, cloud based storage and the memory needs of -
Signature of Controversy
I n “In this volume Granville Sewell provides “As the debate over intelligent design grows T delightful and wide-ranging commentary on increasingly heated... it is refreshing to find a HE the origins debate and intelligent design... discussion of the topic that is calm, thoughtful, Sewell provides much needed clarity on topics and far-ranging, with no sense of having to B e ignature f that are too often misunderstood. His discussion advance an agenda or decimate the opposition. G I S o of the commonly confused problem of entropy In this regard, Granville Sewell’s In the NNI is a must read.” Beginning succeeds brilliantly.” Cornelius G. Hunter, Ph.D. William A. Dembski, Ph.D. N author of The Design Inference author of Science’s Blind Spot G ontroversy A N c In this wide-ranging collection of essays on origins, mathematician Granville Sewell looks at the D big bang, the fine-tuning of the laws of physics, and the evolution of life. He concludes that while O there is much in the history of life that seems to suggest natural causes, there is nothing to support THER Responses to critics of signature in the cEll Charles Darwin’s idea that natural selection of random variations can explain major evolutionary E S advances (“easily the dumbest idea ever taken seriously by science,” he calls it). Sewell explains S A Y why evolution is a fundamentally different and much more difficult problem than others solved s ON by science, and why increasing numbers of scientists are now recognizing what has long been I obvious to the layman, that there is no explanation possible without design. -
Scientists Dissent List
A SCIENTIFIC DISSENT FROM DARWINISM “We are skeptical of claims for the ability of random mutation and natural selection to account for the complexity of life. Careful examination of the evidence for Darwinian theory should be encouraged.” This was last publicly updated April 2020. Scientists listed by doctoral degree or current position. Philip Skell* Emeritus, Evan Pugh Prof. of Chemistry, Pennsylvania State University Member of the National Academy of Sciences Lyle H. Jensen* Professor Emeritus, Dept. of Biological Structure & Dept. of Biochemistry University of Washington, Fellow AAAS Maciej Giertych Full Professor, Institute of Dendrology Polish Academy of Sciences Lev Beloussov Prof. of Embryology, Honorary Prof., Moscow State University Member, Russian Academy of Natural Sciences Eugene Buff Ph.D. Genetics Institute of Developmental Biology, Russian Academy of Sciences Emil Palecek Prof. of Molecular Biology, Masaryk University; Leading Scientist Inst. of Biophysics, Academy of Sci., Czech Republic K. Mosto Onuoha Shell Professor of Geology & Deputy Vice-Chancellor, Univ. of Nigeria Fellow, Nigerian Academy of Science Ferenc Jeszenszky Former Head of the Center of Research Groups Hungarian Academy of Sciences M.M. Ninan Former President Hindustan Academy of Science, Bangalore University (India) Denis Fesenko Junior Research Fellow, Engelhardt Institute of Molecular Biology Russian Academy of Sciences (Russia) Sergey I. Vdovenko Senior Research Assistant, Department of Fine Organic Synthesis Institute of Bioorganic Chemistry and Petrochemistry Ukrainian National Academy of Sciences (Ukraine) Henry Schaefer Director, Center for Computational Quantum Chemistry University of Georgia Paul Ashby Ph.D. Chemistry Harvard University Israel Hanukoglu Professor of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology Chairman The College of Judea and Samaria (Israel) Alan Linton Emeritus Professor of Bacteriology University of Bristol (UK) Dean Kenyon Emeritus Professor of Biology San Francisco State University David W. -
Graphene Sheets Tear Themselves to Ribbons Peeled Strips of Single-Layer Carbon Could Be Useful in Electronic Circuitry
NATURE | NEWS Graphene sheets tear themselves to ribbons Peeled strips of single-layer carbon could be useful in electronic circuitry. Petra Szilágyi 13 July 2016 James Annett Graphene in ribbons: three thin carbon strips which have peeled up after a graphene sheet was punctured by a diamond tip. Graphene, a single-atom-thick sheet of carbon, is stronger than steel and as stiff as diamond. Yet, this tough, thin material can also be induced to peel itself to pieces. Puncturing a hole in graphene with a diamond tip and repeatedly moving that tip back and forth — rather like rucking up a carpet — causes narrow strips of carbon to curl spontaneously upwards, tearing out of the graphene layer and even folding back on themselves, scientists from Trinity College Dublin report in an article in Nature1 on 13 July. The discovery is “entirely surprising”, says James Tour, a specialist in nanotechnology at Rice University in Houston, Texas. Tour says that since the technique is in its infancy and the researchers haven't yet demonstrated they can control it, it's hard to see exactly how it could be used. But the discoverers of the effect, physicists Graham Cross and James Annett, think that it should be possible to control the size of the ribbons and the way that they peel and fold, potentially making them useful in electronic circuitry. Annett — a graduate student at the time of the discovery — happened on the finding by chance, when he was dragging a diamond tip over the surface of graphene to test the carbon sheet’s anti-friction properties. -
Measuring and Understanding Public Opinion on Human Evolution
Measuring and Understanding Public Opinion on Human Evolution A dissertation submitted to the Graduate School of the University of Cincinnati in partial fulfillment of the Requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in the Department of Political Science of the College of Arts and Sciences by Misook Gwon, M.A. Political Science, University of Cincinnati December 2012 Committee Chair: Stephen T. Mockabee, PhD ABSTRACT The theory of evolution has long generated controversy in American society, but Americans‘ attitudes about human evolution are often neglected in studies of ―culture wars‖ and the nature of mass belief systems more generally (Berkman and Plutzer 2010; Freeland and Houston 2009). Gallup and other survey organizations have polled about evolution, but offered limited response categories that mask complexity in public opinion (Bishop 2006; Moore 2008). The main problems concerning the leading survey questions about evolution are: first, questions measure only a single dimension, thus they ignore the potential for multidimensionality in people‘s attitudes. Second, depending on question wording and response options, the results of public opinion surveys vary by polling groups. This is an example of measurement error which misleads the interpretation and impression of American public opinion on the origin of humankind. A number of studies have analyzed Americans‘ beliefs about evolution and hypothesized about the influential effects of several factors (Deckman 2002; Mazur 2005; Mooney 2005; Miller et al. 2006; Newport 2006; Forrest 2007; Nisbet and Goidel 2007; Scott 2009). However, there remains a lack of complete understanding of what Americans know and believe about human evolution. Given the salience of this issue and the significant influence of public opinion on policy-making in America (Page and Shapiro 1992; Stimson 2004; Newport 2004), the measurement error and explanation of polling results on controversial issues related to this topic are in need of clarification. -
A Deeper Look at the Origin of Life by Bob Davis
A Deeper Look at the Origin of Life By Bob Davis Every major society from every age in history has had its own story about its origins. For instance, the Eskimos attributed their existence to a raven. The ancient Germanic peoples of Scandinavia believed their creator—Ymir—emerged from ice and fire, was nourished by a cow, and ultimately gave rise to the human race. Those are just two examples. But no matter the details, these origin stories always endeavor to answer people’s innate questions: Where did we come from? What is our destiny? What is our purpose? Two widely held theories in today’s world are abiogenesis and the Genesis story. The first states that life emerged through nature without any divine guidance; the second involves a supernatural Creator. Abiogenesis Abiogenesis is sometimes called “chemical evolution” because it seeks to explain how non-living (“abio”) substances gave rise to life (“genesis”). Abiogenesis was added to the list of origin stories over one hundred years ago when Charles Darwin first speculated that life could have begun in a “warm little pond, with all sorts of ammonia and phosphoric salts, lights, heat, electricity, etc. present, so that a protein compound was chemically formed ready to undergo still more complex changes.”1 Many summarize abiogenesis—coupled with its more famous twin, Darwinian macroevolution—in a somewhat disparaging but memorable way: “From the goo to you by way of the zoo!”2 Let’s use this phrase to help us understand what is meant by “abiogenesis.” The “goo” refers to the “primordial soup” or “warm little pond” where non-life is said to have given birth to life.