Tuesday, December 27, 2005
Teaching Darwin's Theory "Critically"
I want to make clear that the Discovery Institute as an organization advocates that people interested in this question (ID vs. Darwinism) – school boards and so forth – adopt a policy of teaching Darwin's theory critically – that is, teaching the evidence for and against Darwin's theory, and not mandating the teaching of intelligent design.
And that's all I ask.
I think mandating pure Darwinian Theory or mandating ID in and of itself is the wrong way to go. Right now, though, the public schools teach Darwin like it is absolute truth. One wonders how they could consider it so absolute when most teachers and administrators oppose anything "absolute" and are subjective about every moral question under the sun.
A Feminist in Support of Alito?
Prudence, skepticism and "unbought grace."
Monday, December 26, 2005
ID vs. Darwin
The liberal intelligentsia derides ID because it undermines a major premise in their thinking. All things are explainable sans Dieu.
The ID debate has its roots in the debate about origins. You have dogmatic arguments on both sides of this topic. Those who are dogmatic about Darwin really don’t allow any oxygen for those with a good critique of the theory – this is not scientific. The Darwinist say that ID is based solely on faith, but this is not true. They also discount that many great men of science not only had Faith but applied faith to reasoning when considering the universe. Consider Einstein who continually sought after an elegant universe based upon the foundational idea that there had been an intelligent origin to the universe. Consider Pascal, Newton, Leibniz, and Fibonacci.
We’ll weigh on this topic from time to time.
Saturday, December 24, 2005
Sunday, December 18, 2005
Life as a Blogger
Don't judge blogging by the "average" blog. The average blog is amateurish, just as the average crooner is no American Idol. The law of large numbers guarantees that. How many blogs are out there? Maybe millions. Soon billions. This means, of course, that the vast majority of blogs will be of no interest to you or me. Even a 95th-percentile blog--judged by its quality--has little chance of making it into our busy reading schedules. But don't judge the blogosphere by the average quality. At the top of this huge pyramid are thousands of readable and useful blogs. Think of the blogosphere as a bookstore where no book is refused. A store bigger than the Mall of America. (Ocean, pyramid, bookstore ... too many metaphors, I know.)
Blogs really do threaten the mainstream media. Thought experiment: Suppose you call yourself a pro-technology supply-sider. (That's what I happen to be, because I think Moore's Law and Say's Law drive growth and prosperity in the world.) A reader with such an outlook will find a home at RealClear Politics and Tech Central Station because the editors of those überblogs see the world in the same way. You might ask, "Well, doesn't the Wall Street Journal see the world likewise?" Yeah, mostly. But the WSJ needs thousands of employees and tons of ink and paper to produce its product. RealClear Politics gets by with fewer than ten employees.
Friday, December 16, 2005
A Sunni Disposition
The biggest story of [the Iraqi] election, apart from its obvious milestone character, is the staggeringly high Sunni turnout. In October we were being assured, by the usual experts, that the passage of the constitutional referendum was a disaster, another of many final nails in the coffin of Iraqi democracy: The Sunnis would now never participate in the electoral process. It turns out that they did participate, and they did so with eager anticipation that through the new democratic process their voices could be heard and their interests protected.And I thought all the Sunni's were boycotting the elections because their Shiite friends had a natural majority and were going to lord it over them nonetheless. Well I'll be a blue nosed gopher!
It also turns out that one of the major reasons Sunnis had not participated before was fear that they would be killed by terrorists and insurgents. This time, with 160,000 American troops and thousands of newly trained Iraqi soldiers and police, there was a sense of security. "Last time, if you voted, you died," Abdul Jabbar Mahdi, a Sunni, told the Times's Dexter Filkins. "God willing, this election will lead to peace." As Filkins notes, "Comments from Sunni voters, though anecdotal, suggested that a good number of them had stayed away from the polls in January not because they were disenchanted with the democratic process, but because they were afraid of being killed."
More Fun & Games from Maryland Democrats
Tuesday, December 13, 2005
More on Laffey v. Chafee
In response to today's Club for Growth endorsement of Laffey (see Gary's post below), the NRSC has released this dirty attack document against the conservative challenger.
Says Town Hall: The NRSC should not be spending its money against conservative Republicans... period.
Currently, Laffey is said to be polling very well against Chafee. If Chafee sees the writing on the wall and leaves the party to run as an independent, he would not have to undergo a primary challenge. Town Hall asks: If [Chafee] does this, will the NRSC still support him?
Monday, December 12, 2005
Laffey v. Chafee
Saturday, December 10, 2005
The Lion of Narnia
Subscribe to Posts [Atom]