Creation/Evolution Journal now online

| 10 Comments

The NCSE started publishing a journal called Creation/Evolution in 1980. In 1996 it was merged with Reports of the National Center for Science Education. Now the entire run of Creation/Evolution Journal has been put online. It was OCRed so it’s searchable, but it has not yet been proofread so searches may be a little wonky sometimes.

Via John Pieret.

10 Comments

http://ncseweb.org/cej/3/1/victory-arkansas

I found this article to be of interest.

The parallels to the Dover case are undeniable, just the anti-evolution participants were more dishonest during the Dover trial. What should that tell any IDiot supporter?

How much more dishonest must the anti-evolution side be if the switch scam, currently being run by the ID perp failures, goes to court? From cluelessness to perjury to what next?

Ron,

Several of the court decisions mentioned are available free on the web:

McLean vs Arkansas from TalkOrigins

Segraves vs. California posted by ‘FFire’ (I hope I have that attribution right. If not, I apologize).

And of course the Louisiana law mentioned in the article eventually resulted in Edwards vs. Aguillard (post also care of TalkOrigins).

eric said:

Ron,

Several of the court decisions mentioned are available free on the web:

McLean vs Arkansas from TalkOrigins

Segraves vs. California posted by ‘FFire’ (I hope I have that attribution right. If not, I apologize).

And of course the Louisiana law mentioned in the article eventually resulted in Edwards vs. Aguillard (post also care of TalkOrigins).

You can find links to quite a few court decisions on the Panda’s Thumb link page.

eric said:

Ron,

Several of the court decisions mentioned are available free on the web:

McLean vs Arkansas from TalkOrigins

Segraves vs. California posted by ‘FFire’ (I hope I have that attribution right. If not, I apologize).

And of course the Louisiana law mentioned in the article eventually resulted in Edwards vs. Aguillard (post also care of TalkOrigins).

What I found interesting was the account of the trial and not the written decision of the judge. Sort of like reading a short Devil in Dover.

Very interesting OP. I clicked on the link and became instantly fascinated. But what is obvious from the outset is the fact that the journal is recognizing pseudo-Creationism. Real Creationism, circa 1802-1859, accepted species immutability. Baraminology didn’t even exist until well after the death of Darwin. And real Creationism accepted an Old Earth. I guess recognizing Fundamentalists as the genuine article of Creationism makes Darwinists feel smart, if not superior.

Ray Martinez, Old Earth Creationist-species immutabilist.

Ray wrote:

“But what is obvious from the outset is the fact that the journal is recognizing pseudo-Creationism.”

So, what’s your point? Real scientists are against pseudo science, creationism and pseudo creationism. They are skeptical of any views that are not based on evidence. They are against anyone who seeks to undermine the teaching of real science. They are offended by anyone who views are dogmatic and immutable.

It’s really ironic that those whose views are not based on evidence are always trying to to tell everyone else why other views are not acceptable. We have heard lots of people explain why others are not true Christians, now Ray is going to explain why others are not true creationists. The big tent seems to have some holes showing.

“I guess recognizing Fundamentalists as the genuine article of Creationism makes Darwinists feel smart, if not superior.”

Who cares about feeling superior? What we need to do is defend science education from attacks by nut jobs of all colors. What difference does it make if you are a “real” creationist or a “pseudo” creationist? If you try to attack science education you will be opposed. If you don’t think these people are real creationists then you argue with them, you try to convince them that they are wrong. They disguise their true intentions specifically to undermine science education. Why should that make us any less offended by their actions?

Now Ray, if species are immutable, can you explain to us why all atrhropods have a virtually identical mitochondrial gene order? Can you explain to us why terrestrial artiodactyls share the same SINE insertions as Cetaceans? Can you explain the nested hierarchy of genetic similarities found between all organisms? Can you explain how you can believe that species are immutable when speciation has been observed and documented? Can you explain why your views are immutable in spite of this evidence?

‘Cause the Bible says so. Duh. Next question.

DS said:

Ray wrote:

“I guess recognizing Fundamentalists as the genuine article of Creationism makes Darwinists feel smart, if not superior.”

Who cares about feeling superior?

In any case, boasting that you’re smarter than a creationist is like boasting that you own the tallest building in Podunk, North Dakota. It is no sign of superiority.

For legal resources, don’t forget NCSE’s creationism and the law page: http://ncseweb.org/creationism/lega[…]ationism-law

The page pretty much has it all, in one place. Just posted the Comer v. Scott appeal, in fact.

Dear Madam, Dear Sir, I have written a 30 pages manuscript on Evolutionary Creation of Life and Human being. A revolutionary understanding of islam texts (Holy Koran and Prophetic Sayings) is presented in this paper that I wish to publish in a peer review journal. Please read the abstract below and I am waitng to hear from you.

Best Thanks and Regards

An evolutionary creation of life: Homo sapiens between science and Islam

Abstract: There is necessarily no contradiction between evolution of species and creationism in Islam which instructs human beings literally to inspect the procedure of creation “Koran 29. 20”. Koran recites the story of creation of man in insightful verses worthy of interest “Koran 32.7-9”. An illuminated interpretation of these verses supported by authentic scholars is detailed in this paper. Evolution could have happened in the creational process that started by dust, then there was reproduction, later on, distinguishing and honoring of man by making him complete and breathing into him of God’s spirit. These verses were classically taken in a developmental context. In this paper, Koran and authentic Prophetic demonstrate that the creation was in steps and that God’s breathing came into the first honored man who was Adam in a later phase (e. g. an evolutionary skip). Therefore, evolution of human being seems to be documented in Koran since more than 14 centuries ago! The late literature on the hominid Ardipithecus ramidus, Ardi (2009) confirms these concepts. God, therefore, attributed extraordinary spiritual and physiognomic values to man’s creation. Man, has a unique value far away from the common chemical, physical and biological basis of all organisms. Man, should, therefore be unique in his stewardship on Earth, a role compatible with his extra material elements even though all creatures deserve respect as they are “genera like yourselves”.

Key words: Creation, evolution, Homo sapiens, Islam, science, stewardship on Earth.

Dr. Bilal Ghareeb (associate professor in molecular biology and biotechnology ) Department of Biology and Biotechnology Arab American University-Jenin (AAUJ) P. O. Box 240 Jenin-Palestine Fax: + 972 4 2510 810 Phones (Office): + 972 4 2510 801/2/3/4/5 Ext. 144 Home: + 972 4 2520 030 Cellular: + 972 599 727 717 E-mail: [Enable javascript to see this email address.] and [Enable javascript to see this email address.]

About this Entry

This page contains a single entry by Richard B. Hoppe published on August 6, 2009 4:46 AM.

Blogging Batholiths Part 2 was the previous entry in this blog.

Ethically Challenged Ben Stein Fired from NYT is the next entry in this blog.

Find recent content on the main index or look in the archives to find all content.

Categories

Archives

Author Archives

Powered by Movable Type 4.361

Site Meter