Please note that links will take you directly to the source. AiG is not responsible for content on the news websites to which we refer.
1. Columbus Dispatch: Evolution a hard sell for many
Ohio's major newspaper The Columbus Dispatch reports on Susan Fisher's Biology 101 class at [The] Ohio State University, and how students react to the teaching of evolution. Fisher's view is:
I'm not here to challenge their belief systems. I'm here to show the difference between science and religion.
(One wonders what happens if a student has a belief different from Fisher's about science and religion.) But Fisher cautions that she's “not hacked off anymore” when students don't accept evolution. “I want them to at least understand what they're rejecting. If they choose to ignore it, that's their prerogative.”
And many do, such as 19-year-old Kaleigh Paul, one of Fisher's students, who explains that she's “gone through so many biology classes and it hasn't convinced me yet … I was raised with creationism.” However, Paul acknowledges that the evidence and arguments Fisher presents are logical (perhaps she should read some articles in our philosophy section).
Fisher adds in closing that she “came to terms with her own religious and scientific beliefs years ago.” Yet she declares:
But it really doesn't matter what was the starting point … [i]t could have been the big bang or God establishing the final laws of physics. We'll never know. That's why we call it faith.
2. BBC NEWS: Chimps 'are people, too'
An episode of the British TV program Horizon tackles that ancient, “tough” question, “Are chimps people?”
We're only joking, of course; though the similarities between chimpanzees and humans are interesting (and, when it comes to DNA, often 4381), they no more support evolution than do similarities between, say, dogs and humans. For instance, imagine a world in which (A) everyone accepted evolution, and (B) there were no primates other than humans. In this world, would evolutionists not latch on to the similarities between dogs and humans as evidence of common ancestry? Rather than pointing out the “culture” chimpanzees exhibit, scientists would point out the humanlike emotional behavior of dogs, the relationship-forming nature of most dogs, the learning ability of dogs, and so forth. In fact, these traits can be found in many mammals. But would any of this provide more support for common ancestry than it would for a common designer? Of course not. Likewise, chimpanzee behavior does not prove common ancestry any more than it proves common design. After all, ten buildings, all made out of similar bricks and with similar architecture, shows the same designer.
However, as time passes, and as Darwinists fully accept the principles their theory teaches and apply them consistently, we may see 4233.
3. Detroit Free Press: Schools must teach evolution& Columbus Dispatch: State education board drops evolution debate
In Michigan and Ohio this week, evolution has “won out” in the debate over public school science education. Education boards in both states closed the issue-in Michigan, approving new science curriculum guidelines that do not endorse intelligent design, and in Ohio, voting to discharge a subcommittee formed to examine legal issues related to critically analyzing evolution in the state science curriculum.
The Free Press-by accident-explains the educational environment that will result:
The board also removed ambiguous language that could lead some to question the validity of evolution.
Apparently, evolutionists are intent on suppressing any questioning spirit in students. What a tragedy it would be if students were actually taught to consider and examine both interpretations of an issue when coming to conclusions!
4. CNN: Yahoo laser to ask: Anybody there?
Those who read about Cosmic Connexion in 14608 won't be surprised to read this story-about another attempt to send messages to extraterrestrial life.
This project, a part of Yahoo!'s “Time Capsule” project, will involve a laser signal broadcast into space later this month. The point of origin will be Mexico's pagan Pyramid of the Sun.
As we commented last week, as long as people follow evolution-based worldviews and believe life can spontaneously “spring up,” there will always be those trying to contact aliens.
[Editor's note: Mexican authorities later banned Yahoo! from using the Pyramid of the Sun due to fear that the ancient buildings would be damaged.]
5. AP: Broadway Revival of 'Inherit the Wind'
Disinformation about the Dayton, Tennessee, Scopes trial is set to soon flow again: the famous play, Inherit the Wind (later adapted into a 1960 film) will be revived on Broadway and star Christopher Plummer (remember him as the captain in The Sound of Music?) and Brian Dennehy.
The Scopes “monkey” trial, a spectacle that resulted from what amounted to an ACLU publicity campaign, is often used to ridicule creationist views-even though popular conception of the trial is based on the mistake-ridden film Inherit the Wind, which, along with the play, has 14662.
There are several ways to learn the real story of the Scopes trial-including articles such as 2582, 10359, 4261, 10405, 4241, and 5599. Or, check out excellent resources such as Dr. David Menton's booklet Inherit the Wind-a Hollywood History of the Scopes Trial or his DVD of the same name.
In short, there's no excuse for the 4249 promoted by Inherit the Wind!
Meet Carsonella ruddii, recently declared the owner of the world's smallest genome-“only” 159,662 base pairs of DNA. The announcement, along with reports of another “simple” bacterium (“only” 400,000 base pairs) prompted physicist Philip Ball to ask, “How small can a genome get and still run a living organism?”
Scientists are encouraged by news of these simpler organisms because it inspires hopes of creating “designer bacteria” in the lab-bacteria that could be engineered to perform specific, useful functions. However, C. ruddii is 14606 and lives inside sap-feeding insects; they depend on the insects for survival, and are actually too simple to survive on their own.
What's interesting to consider is that these are the simplest genomes out there, yet they contain as much information content as a short book. There is no known mechanism for even this small amount of information to arise by chance, even though the idea of molecules-to-man evolution relies on the chance amalgamation of an organism capable of surviving and reproducing itself before natural selection could even begin.
7. Reuters: Fossil embryos caught in the act of dividing
Geologists reported this week on the analysis of fossilized embryos discovered in the Doushantuo Formation in China's Guizhou Province. Based on uniformitarian assumptions, the scientists believe these embryos are approximately 600 million years old. Modern embryos, after hundreds of millions of years of evolution, must be completely different, right? But what have the researchers discovered?
In other words, these embryos appear to be identical to the embryos of modern-day animals. Yet because of the assumptions behind the 14611, they are assumed to be eons old.
This article also offers a glimpse at how evolutionary postulations are easily amplified by the media in order to sensationalize stories. For example, the first paragraph of this article boldly claims:
Six hundred million years ago, in what is now China, a small, sponge-like animal laid eggs that started to divide into embryos.
Yet when we finally read the very last paragraph, we discover:
Hagadorn [the study leader] said no one knows what kind of animals would have grown from these embryos, but guessed it might be a sponge-like creature.
Of course, there's absolutely no evidence behind this wild guess; only a mountain of evolutionary assumptions. Yet the article leads off by spreading the false idea, which many who do not read the full article will take as a scientific certainty.
Also interesting is the fact that these embryos were fossilized-and especially that they were fossilized while dividing. The traditional uniformitarian model of fossils forming over long periods of time is entirely impotent to explain such rapid fossilization. First, it would have to explain how these embryos would simply die while separating. Second, it would have to explain how these embryos-which are described as “little blobs of jelly”-could have lasted, exposed to the elements, for years and years before being buried and fossilized.
The obvious truth (to which even evolutionists subscribe) is that these fossils were formed catastrophically.
8. National Geographic News: Earth's “Wobbles” Spurring Cycles of Evolution and Extinction?
Evolutionary researchers recently hypothesized that subtle changes in the earth's axial tilt are causing a cycle of extinction and evolution. The idea postulates that as earth's tilt fluctuates from 22-25°, it ushers in long-term climate changes that “explain the subsequent rise and fall of many species.”
However, the fossils we see-buried in mass graves, and “frozen” while in the process of eating, giving birth, or even dividing (as in item 7)-are better explained by the catastrophic Flood of Noah's day.
9. Reuters: Birds and bees may be gay: museum exhibition
A new exhibit in a Norwegian museum is pushing the idea that homosexuality is natural. The exhibit, “Against Nature,” references examples of homosexual behavior, which the exhibit's designer claims has been observed in 1,500 animal species.
But one might ask, is adultery/polygamy 'natural'? Or for that matter, is murder natural? Is theft natural? All these behaviors are common among animals, and so in some sense, are “natural.” Humans dwell in natural bodies that are predisposed to sin because of the Curse. So many people could attempt to justify sin by claiming that it's “only natural.” Why not be cannibalistic? Praying mantises are, after all!
Even ignoring the animal kingdom and focusing on humans, we see that humans are prone to many behaviors-murder, rape, theft, deceit, etc.-that could be called “natural,” yet that are not endorsed by most people. So simply showing a behavior to be natural is not the same as showing it to be right (although one wonders how Darwinists draw a distinction).
Furthermore, the entire idea of what is “natural” hinges on one's idea of the origin of nature. If all nature is random, and if humans share common ancestry with all other living things (and, theoretically, non-living things), then it is understandable for humans to try to justify behavior as “natural” by showing that animals behave in the same fashion.
But if humans were created in the image of God, separate from animals, then what is “natural” for us-in the sense of “how God created us”-is to obey Him.
Remember, if you see a news story that might merit some attention, let us know about it! And thanks to all of our readers who have submitted great news tips to us. If you didn't catch last week's News to Note, why not take a look at it now? See you next week!
Help keep these daily articles coming. Support AiG.
“Is creation a viable model of origins in today’s modern scientific era?” This DVD features Bill Nye and Ken Ham debating one of the biggest questions concerning the scientific community today.
Answers magazine is the Bible-affirming, creation-based magazine from Answers in Genesis. In it you will find fascinating content and stunning photographs that present creation and worldview articles along with relevant cultural topics. Each quarterly issue includes a detachable chart, a pullout children’s magazine, a unique animal highlight, excellent layman and semi-technical articles, plus bonus content. Why wait? Subscribe today and get a FREE DVD download!