Nearly Two-Thirds of Doctors Skeptical of Darwin’s Theory of Evolution
SEATTLE, WA – A recent poll by the Louis Finkelstein Institute for Social and Religious Research finds that 60% of doctors reject Darwinism, saying that they do not think humans evolved through natural processes alone. Only 38% of the doctors polled agreed with the statement that “Humans evolved naturally with no supernatural involvement.” The study also reported that 1/3 of Read More ›
What Intelligent Design Is and Isn’t
Debating Design
This Cambridge University Press volume, co-edited by leading design theorist William Dembski, and leading Darwinist philosopher of science Michael Ruse, provides perspectives from scholars on many sides of the ID-debate. The book provides a perfect template for those who would be interested in a comprehensive approach to biological origins in schools: it contains essays by proponents of Darwinism, self-organization, and Read More ›
Agents Under Fire
In the first study of its kind, Agents Under Fire defends a robust notion of agency and intentionality against eliminative and naturalistic alternatives, showing the interconnections between the philosophy of mind, theology, and Intelligent Design. Menuge argues that Behe’s irreducible complexity is a challenge to reductionism not only in biology, but also in psychology, and shows the inability of the Darwinian psychology Read More ›
By Design or by Chance?
DNA by Design
What Darwin Didn’t Know
The Design Revolution
The Design Revolution by mathematician and philosopher William Dembski is perhaps the best “bang for your buck” treatment on intelligent design. Dembski is a leading design theorist and Senior Fellow at the Discovery Institute. This popular work serves almost as an “FAQ” on intelligent design. It is ideal for the layperson who would like to understand intelligent design and see how Read More ›
Science and Religion Twenty Years After Mclean V. Arkansas
I. Introduction The conventional wisdom in constitutional law is that the debate that began with the famous Scopes trial in 19251 over the teaching of origins in public school science classrooms officially ended in 1987. In that year the U.S. Supreme Court, in Edwards v. Aguillard, 2 struck down a Louisiana statute, the Balanced Treatment Act, that required its public Read More ›
Intelligent Design and Creationism Just Aren’t the Same
Recent news accounts about controversies over evolution in Ohio and Georgia have contained references to the scientific theory of “intelligent design.” Some advocates of Darwinian evolution try to conflate “intelligent design” (ID) with “creationism,” sometimes using the term “intelligent design creationism.”1 In fact, intelligent design is quite different from “creationism,” as even some of its critics have acknowledged. University of Read More ›
Report from Hillsdale College Symposium on ID
The symposium speakers were (in order of appearance) Larry Arnhart (Northern Illinois University), Michael Ruse (Florida State University), Mano Singham (Case Western Reserve University), Michael Behe (Lehigh University), Niles Eldredge (American Museum of Natural History), Jonathan Wells (Discovery Institute), and William Dembski (Baylor University). The symposium ended with a Hillsdale College Faculty Roundtable chaired by David Whalen (English) and consisting Read More ›