Tag Archives: Creationism

Discovery Institute: Indiana Bill “Bad Science and Bad Education”

A press release that just came from the Discovery Institute: Indianapolis – A bill approved today by the Indiana Senate to allow the teaching of creationism in public schools is being criticized as bad science education by Discovery Institute, the nation’s leading intelligent design think tank. [From Discovery Institute - Article Database - Leading Intelligent …

February 1, 2012 – 3:54 pm | By Tom Gilson | Posted in Origins and Science | Tagged , , , , , | Comments (11)

“What Is Pseudoscience?: Scientific American”

So far so good from Michael Shermer, writing at Scientific American, as he quotes Michael D. Gordin in an excellent, pithy analysis: “individual scientists (as distinct from the monolithic ‘scientific community’) designate a doctrine a ‘pseudoscience’ only when they perceive themselves to be threatened—not necessarily by the new ideas themselves, but by what those ideas …

September 18, 2011 – 6:00 am | By Tom Gilson | Posted in Origins and Science | Tagged , , , , , | Comments (13)

SciAm Endorses Teaching the Controversy?

Could this be? Looks like John Rennie, who until recently was the long-time Editor-in-Chief of Scientific American, thinks it’s a good idea to teach the controversy! The roughly 60 percent in the mushy middle steered around conflicts between evolution and creationism or taught both and let students draw their own conclusions. (Always such a good idea….) …

January 28, 2011 – 7:12 pm | By Tom Gilson | Posted in Origins and Science | Tagged , , , | Comments (1)

More evidence for miscommunication

Thank you, Larry Fafarman, for answering this, written by Nick Matzke at Panda’s Thumb: Just last week over at the Thinking Christian blog there was a huge stink raised over the alleged inappropriateness of linking ID to creationism. After much argument the anti-linkage people more or less conceded that there were some good reasons to …

October 30, 2009 – 10:52 am | By Tom Gilson | Posted in Origins and Science | Tagged , | Comments (55)

Concluding Unscientific Postscript

This entry is part 8 of 8 in the series Is ID Creationism?

Commenter John on one of the recent Intelligent Design threads said that science never interprets results after bringing them in. I think there’s truth in that as a general principle, though its extreme nature makes it subject to frequent exceptions, and not the absolute truth he seemed to want it to be. Anyway, I’m about …

October 19, 2009 – 5:20 pm | By Tom Gilson | Posted in Origins and Science | Tagged , | Comments (32)

Who Defines ID?

This entry is part 7 of 8 in the series Is ID Creationism?

In my earlier post this morning I covered definitions of creationism quite thoroughly but I didn’t include a definition of Intelligent Design. There was one in the post I wrote last Sunday, but not all readers would know that. I wrote: ID sees phenomena like the high information content in biological organisms, instances of apparent …

October 16, 2009 – 10:40 am | By Tom Gilson | Posted in The Faith | Tagged , | Comments (76)

“ID Creationism:” The Communication Question

This entry is part 6 of 8 in the series Is ID Creationism?

Cameron said this morning, in the thread, “Maybe They Really Can’t Tell the Difference,” The relevant purpose here, per the OP, is to determine if ID shares enough similarities with creationism to justify using the term “ID creationism.” That’s an excellent clarifying point, so thank you, Cameron. The answer is quite simple. The point of …

October 16, 2009 – 7:12 am | By Tom Gilson | Posted in Origins and Science | Tagged , | Comments (24)

ID and Creationism: Learning As I Go

This entry is part 5 of 8 in the series Is ID Creationism?

A few days I posed a tentative question, wondering whether some of those who do not distinguish Intelligent Design from creationism may be exhibiting a kind of worldview blindness, one that causes them to see everyone different themselves as being all the same. That led to one of the highest-velocity discussions I can remember having …

October 14, 2009 – 12:56 pm | By Tom Gilson | Posted in Origins and Science | Tagged , | Comments (54)

Questions For Those Who Believe ID Is Creationism

This entry is part 4 of 8 in the series Is ID Creationism?

Yesterday in the thread on ID and creationism, a commenter using the handle “Wheels” pointed out, The starting point [for both ID and creationism] is with religion, namely Christianity in this case. The arguments used in Pandas were all Scientific Creationism arguments. The terminology used in Pandas‘ early drafts were all old-hat Creationism. When ID …

October 13, 2009 – 1:13 pm | By Tom Gilson | Posted in Origins and Science | Tagged , | Comments (62)

Maybe They Really Can’t Tell the Difference

This entry is part 3 of 8 in the series Is ID Creationism?

Several times in the last few days the term “Intelligent Design Creationism” has crossed my line of sight. It’s a misnomer, a duct-taped concatenation of concepts that overlap somewhat, but not enough to merit being stuck together the way ID opponents have done. Robert Pennock is perhaps the worst, but Barbara Forrest, Richard Dawkins, and …

October 11, 2009 – 5:25 pm | By Tom Gilson | Posted in Origins and Science | Tagged , | Comments (228)