Uncommon Sense

politics and society are, unfortunately, much the same thing

Sick!… Far Left Digs Into Prejean’s Parent’s Divorce Papers
May 14, 2009 by Gateway Pundit

Wow, where’s “move-on” when you need them?

The Far Left dug into the divorce papers of Carrie Prejean’s parents to discredit the beauty who spoke out against gay marriage.

politics, liberalism, left wing, hate speech, intelligent design, bigotry, homosexuality, news

Filed under: bigotry, hate speech, homosexuality, intelligent design, left wing, liberalism, news, politics

Soldier-slandering, Radical Left-wing Cartoonist Rall Laid Off
April 24, 2009 by Ken Shepherd

Radical left-wing cartoonist Ted Rall — who reveled in dismissing American servicemen as “idiots” — was recently laid off.

Rall may be virtually alone when it comes to taking pride in his work. Not content to keep his Hitler comparisons to elected politicians like George W. Bush or Dick Cheney, Rall often spilled his venom on the likes of American servicemen and 9/11 widows. In one of his most infamous drawings, he compared U.S. soldiers to Islamist suicide bombers….

politics, anti-religion, left wing, liberalism, intelligent design, hate speech, troops, military, news media bias

Filed under: anti-religion, bias, hate speech, intelligent design, left wing, liberalism, military, news media, politics, troops

My Views on the Evidence for a Created Universe
science, evolution, creation, intelligent design

by King David 8

Please note that this site is not a defense of Young-Earth Creationism, a belief I do not happen to agree with. This is simply a defense of the idea that our universe was created by an intelligent designer. I would like to note that I used to be a Naturalist (one who believes that the universe had no intelligent creator), so I believe that I understand the arguments for both sides to a fair degree.

There are really three parts to the Creationism question.
1) Did the universe begin to exist?
2) What can we logically and scientifically conclude about whatever force (if any) caused the universe to exist?
3) Does the ‘God of the Bible’ fit the criteria for whatever force caused the universe to exist?

Filed under: creation, evolution, intelligent design, science

Some Useful Information About Origins for Students in Undergraduate Biology Classes
science, scientists, evolution, creation, creationism, intelligent design

Robert DiSilvestro, Ph.D.

Undergraduate biology classes often make statements about origins of life, species or even the universe. In many cases, these statements seem to remove the need for any involvement of a creator God. However, the credibility of many of these statements can be called into question. Below, I provide some short pieces of information that can be used to pose such questions.

Filed under: creation, creationism, evolution, intelligent design, science, scientists

science, evolution, creation, creationism, scientists, intelligent design

An astounding amount of scientific evidence disproving evolutionary theory has been uncovered. Here is part of that evidence.

Filed under: creation, creationism, evolution, intelligent design, science, scientists

Creation Wiki
creation, creationism, intelligent design, organizations, science

Filed under: creation, creationism, intelligent design, organizations, science

Immune system is irreducibly complex
creationism, evolution, science, intelligent design

The human immune system is irreducibly complex, indicating that it must have been designed.

Filed under: creationism, evolution, intelligent design, science

Darwin’s Black Box – The biochemical challenge to evolution.
evolution, creationism, science, scientists, intelligent design

The “irreducible complexity” of structures at a molecular level is a modern equivalent to Paley’s watch

Michael Behe is part of the intelligent design movement, who also include Phillip E Johnson, William A Dembski, Stephen C Meyer, Paul Nelson, Robert C Koons and Dr. Walter L Bradley.

Darwin admitted: “If it could be demonstrated that any complex organ existed which could not possibly have been formed by numerous, successive, slight modifications, my theory would absolutely breakdown” (Darwin Origin of Species, 6th ed. NYU, 1988, p. 154).

“No one at Harvard University, no one at the National Institutes of Health, no member of the National Academy of Sciences, no Nobel prize winner–no one at all can give a detailed account of how the cilium, or vision, or blood clotting, or any complex biochemical process might have developed in a Darwinian fashion. But we are here. All these things got here somehow; if not in a Darwinian fashion, then how?” (Behe, Darwin’s Black Box, 187).

Filed under: creationism, evolution, intelligent design, science, scientists

Experimental Support for the Design Inference

Molecular Machines:
Experimental Support for the Design Inference

creationism, intelligent design, science, evolution

irreducibly complex irreducible complexity

How do we see? In the 19th century the anatomy of the eye was known in great detail and the sophisticated mechanisms it employs to deliver an accurate picture of the outside world astounded everyone who was familiar with them. Scientists of the 19th century correctly observed that if a person were so unfortunate as to be missing one of the eye’s many integrated features, such as the lens, or iris, or ocular muscles, the inevitable result would be a severe loss of vision or outright blindness. Thus it was concluded that the eye could only function if it were nearly intact.

As Charles Darwin was considering possible objections to his theory of evolution by natural selection in The Origin of Species he discussed the problem of the eye in a section of the book appropriately entitled “Organs of Extreme Perfection and Complication.” He realized that if in one generation an organ of the complexity of the eye suddenly appeared, the event would be tantamount to a miracle. Somehow, for Darwinian evolution to be believable, the difficulty that the public had in envisioning the gradual formation of complex organs had to be removed.

Filed under: creationism, evolution, intelligent design, science



January 2020
« Dec