Witamy w serwisie internetowym Polskiego Towarzystwa Kreacjonistycznego

Adam Synowiec, "Religia przyszłości" (2006)

Nowa Fantastyka Nr 1 2006, http://portalwiedzy.onet.pl/0,8348,1303873,czasopisma.html

Jak granik rafę uratował

Przykład niemocy TE w przewidywaniu zjawisk biologicznych w zwiazku z rafą koralową

Laura Sheahen, "The Problem with God: Interview with Richard Dawkins" (2005)

beliefnet http://www.beliefnet.com/story/178/story_17889_1.html

Tom Heneghan, "Catholics and Evolution: Interview with Cardinal Christoph Schönborn" (2006)

beliefnet Posted Jan. 5, 2006; http://www.beliefnet.com/story/182/story_18220_1.html

Albert Alschuler, "The Dover Intelligent Design Decision, Part III: Compatibility" (2005)

The University of Chicago. The Law School. The Faculty Blog December 31, 2005; http://uchicagolaw.typepad.com/faculty/2005/12/the_dover_intel_2.html

Bradley Monton, "Is Intelligent Design Science? Dissecting the Dover Decision" (2006) pdf

"PhilSci Archive" http://philsci-archive.pitt.edu/archive/00002583/; http://philsci-archive.pitt.edu/archive/00002583/ --- Abstract --- In the case of Kitzmiller et al. v. Dover Area School District, et al., Judge Jones ruled that a pro-intelligent design disclaimer cannot be read to public school students. In his decision, he gave demarcation criteria for what counts as science, ruling that intelligent design fails these criteria. I argue that these criteria are flawed, with most of my focus on the criterion of methodological naturalism. The way to refute intelligent design is not by declaring it unscientific, but by showing that the empirical evidence for design is not there.

Mark Perakh, "Sewell's thermodynamic failure" (2006)

"Talk Reason" published: Jan 03, 2006; http://www.talkreason.org/articles/Sewell.cfm --- Abstract --- Young earth creationists used to fallaciously refer to the 2nd law of thermodynamics as an allegedly insurmountable obstacle to evolution. Since straightforward young earth creationism gradually retreated to such fringe outlets as Answers in Genesis, the Institute of Creation Research, and Hovind's entertainment shops (being replaced by intelligent design movement as the main anti-evolution force), reference to the 2nd law of thermodynamics has rarely been heard as an anti-evolution argument. However, this pseudo-scientific argument has not been completely abandoned by anti-evolution forces, both of YEC and ID varieties. From time to time it recrudesces in the writing of this or that advocate of creationism. One example of such a misuse of the 2nd law of thermodynamics is a recent article by professor of mathematics Granville Sewell, titled Evolution's Thermodynamic Failure. In this post Mark Perakh, drawing on his expertise in thermodynamics, discusses Sewell's article, and demonstrates Sewell's misinterpretation of certain thermodynamic concepts which led Sewall to unsubstantiated conclusions, as in fact the 2nd law of thermodynamics in no way prohibits evolution.

Jason Rosenhouse, "Why is it Unconstitutional to Teach Intelligent Design?" (2006)

"Talk Reason" published: Jan 02, 2006; http://www.talkreason.org./articles/Unconstitutional.cfm --- Anstract --- Professor Rosenhouse surveys the outcome of the Kitzmiller vs. DASD case. While the entire decision by Judge Jones is exciting reading, this survey may be handy for those readers who would like to have rather a more succinct (but still fairly complete) report on the main points of the decision. Originally posted on CSICOP site (http://www.csicop.org/intelligentdesignwatch/dover.html).

Jean E. Barker, "The Christian roots of capitalism" (2005)

Review of "The Victory of Reason: How Christianity Led to Freedom, Capitalism, and Western Success" by Rodney Stark (Random House 2005), "San Francisco Chronicle" Sunday, December 25, 2005; http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/c/a/2005/12/25/RVGDDG9CUE1.DTL

M.V. Simkin, V.P. Roychowdhury, "Read before you cite!" (2002)

 

Hazel Muir, "Scientists exposed as sloppy reporters" (2002)

"New Scientist" 09:30 14 December 2002; http://www.newscientist.com/article.ns?id=dn3168

Alec Russell, "Darwin's defenders go into battle again" (2005)

"Telegraph" Filed: 31/12/2005; http://news.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2005/12/31/wdesign31.xml The print version had the title: "Defenders of Darwin face a new struggle", Daily Telegraph, 31 December 2005, page 12.

Mary Wakefield, "This is a fight the Designers have to lose" (2005)

"Telegraph" Filed: 23/10/2005; http://www.telegraph.co.uk/opinion/main.jhtml?xml=/opinion/2005/10/23/do2306.xml

Harry Mount, "Keep the divine out of biology lessons, federal judge rules" (2005)

"Telegraph" Filed: 21/12/2005; http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml;jsessionid=DEDDV1JGPWM0LQFIQMFSFFWAVCBQ0IV0?xml=/news/2005/12/21/wus21.xml

Roger Highfield, "Pandas give thumbs-up to theory of evolution"(2005)

"Telegraph" Filed: 29/12/2005; http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2005/12/29/npanda29.xml

Francis Galton, "'The part of religion in human evolution" (1894)

"National Review" 1894 vol. 23, s. 755-63; http://galton.org/

Richard Dawkins, "Religion's real child abuse" (2002)

"Free Inquiry" Buffalo: Fall 2002. Vol. 22, Iss. 4, p. 9-12 (2 pp.) --- Abstract (Document Summary) --- Odious as the physical abuse of children by priests undoubtedly is, Dawkins suspects that it may do them less lasting damage than the mental abuse of having been brought up Catholic in the first place. The threat of eternal hell is an extreme example of mental abuse, just as violent sodomy is an extreme example of physical abuse.

Matthew J. Brayer, Barbara Forrest, Steven G. Gey, "Is It Science Yet?: Intelligent Designe Creationism and the Constitution" (2005)

"Washington University Law Quarterly" 2005, vol. 83, no. 1, s. 1-149; http://law.wustl.edu/WULQ/83-1/p%201%20Brauer%20Forrest%20Gey%20book%20pages.pdf --- Abstract --- On several occasions during the last eighty years, states have attempted to either prohibit the teaching of evolution in public school science classes or counter the teaching of evolution with mandatory references to the religious doctrine of creationism. The Supreme Court struck down examples of the first two generations of these statutes, holding that they violated the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment. A third generation of creationist legislation is now being proposed. Under this new generation of creationism legislation, science teachers would present so-called “intelligent design” theory as an alternative to evolution. Intelligent design theory asserts that a supernatural intelligence intervened in the natural world to dictate the nature and ordering of all biological species, which do not evolve from lower-to higher-order beings. This article considers whether these intelligent design creationism proposals can survive constitutional scrutiny. The authors analyze the religious, philosophical, and scientific details of intelligent design theory, and assess these details in light of the constitutional doctrine developed by the Court in its previous creationism decisions. The Article discusses several factors that pose problems for intelligent design theory, including the absence of objective scientific support for intelligent design, evidence of strong links between intelligent design and religious doctrine, the use of intelligent design to limit the dissemination of scientific theories that are perceived as contradicting religious teachings, and the fact that the irreducible core of intelligent design theory is what the Court has called the “manifestly religious” concept of a God or Supreme Being. Based on these details, the authors conclude that intelligent design theory cannot survive scrutiny under the constitutional framework used by the Court to invalidate earlier creationism mandates.

Anne Marie Lofaso, "The Constitutional Debate over Teaching Intelligent Design as Science in Public Schools" (2005) pdf

American Constitution Society for Law and Policy December 2005; http://www.acslaw.org/pdf/Intelligent_Design_White_Paper.pdf --- Abstract --- This essay is a broad review of the evolution vs. creationism controversy, with emphasis on the legal aspects regarding teaching ID in science classes of public schools, but also discussing the question of whether ID is science (in author's view, it is not). It provides a succinct but rather complete review of the USA courts' decisions regarding the inclusion of ID and of older forms of creationism into school curricula.

Charles F. Austerberry, "Designs on science" (2006)

The Dover decision shows that the courtroom is not the place to debate theories of origins, "Science & Theology News" January 2, 2006; http://www.stnews.org/News-2540.htm