Twins who literally share a body have different selves, personalities
Does neuroscience leave room for God?
Human mental abilities: the result of cultural cross-fertilisation As if.
Language: No current theory of its origin is worth much
Language: Not a sophisticated version of primal screams
By Regis Nicoll
Yesterday the State Supreme Court made California the second state to legalize gay "marriage." They did so in a 4-3 decision that overturned legislation which had banned "marriage" for same-sex couples. Stunningly, the will of the California electorate was effectively overruled by the opinion of one unelected official. And what may come as a surprise to some, six of the seven justices were Republican appointees.
The City Attorney who argued the case for the plaintiffs had this to say: "Today the California Supreme Court took a giant leap to ensure that everybody -- not just in the state of California, but throughout the country -- will have equal treatment under the law."
That's odd. Last time I checked, folks with homosexual orientations have always had "equal treatment under the law" with respect to folks with heterosexual orientations: both groups have been free to marry, just not (until recent years) with someone of the same sex.
One is left to wonder when "equal treatment" will allow brothers to marry their sisters, mothers to marry their sons, a woman to marry her dolphin (oops!--that's already been done), and, in light of recent news, a pogonia to marry its (er...his, her?) gardener.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
For further information on gay "marriage," you can refer to my past articles, The Dangers of Same-Sex “Marriage” and Being Gay and Christian.
By Regis Nicoll
…just not one of the divine sort. That is the conclusion of Canadian biologist Stuart Kauffman. We need “God” because, in the estimation of Kauffman and increasing numbers of researchers, natural laws are inadequate to account for the complexity of life.
Notes Kauffman, “I do not believe that the evolution of biosphere, economy and human culture are derivable from or reducible to physics. Physicists cannot deduce, simulate or confirm the detailed evolution of the biosphere that gave rise to the organised structure and processes that constitute, for example, your heart.” (Not to mention man’s heart.) Kauffman continues, “There seems to be no natural law sufficient to describe Darwinian pre-adaptations.”
In other words, evolutionary theory provides no way to determine how a physiological feature will change under future environmental pressures, or identify the past transitions and changes that led up to an existent feature.
This is serious. If Darwinian evolution is not fully governed by physical laws, it has no predictive value, beyond a few minor adaptations like pesticide resistance (a charge, it will be noted, often leveled against intelligent design). What is the entrenched materialist to do?
Kauffman cedes that “beyond natural law…is ceaseless creativity.” Then, just when you think he is about to invoke the Divine, he adds, “with no supernatural creator.” My! Where did that come from?
Yet, Kauffman urges, we must “reinvent the sacred” by asking,
[W]hat is more awesome: to believe that God created everything in six days, or to believe that the biosphere came into being on its own, with no creator, and partially lawlessly?
Creation ex nihilo may be “awesome,” but creation per nihilo is, well, to put it as delicately as possible, feeble-minded. All the same, Dr. Kauffman has, no doubt, found religion:
I find the latter proposition [creation per nihilo] so stunning, so worthy of awe and respect, that I am happy to accept this natural creativity in the universe as a reinvention of "God". From it, we can build a sense of the sacred that encompasses all life and the planet itself. From it, we can change our value system across the globe and try, together, to ease the fears of religious fundamentalists with a safe, sacred space we can share.
I wouldn't bank on those "religious fundamentalists" warming up to his new "sense of the sacred." They happen to be quite particular about that supernatural Creator.
by Geoff Battersby
Beginning with Salvo 5 (available by the end of the month), Barbara Nicolosi will have a regular interview/column in the magazine. To get a sneak peak of what is coming, you can listen to the full unedited interview by Bobby Maddex on this podcast. Nicolosi looks at some of the films that were nominated for Academy Awards this year. Interesting insights on film and culture.
by Geoff Battersby
A very interesting (and funny) interview by Woody Allen of Billy Graham. Yes, really. Two polar-opposite worldviews have a friendly conversation.
HT: ayjay
Albert Einstein's letter coming up at auction: Does it show that he was an atheist? (I think that's just a publicity ploy.)
Materialists start to come to grips with failure, but materialism dies hard (Sorry, BoBos, it's not up to you to decide where it will end. It will end where the evidence leads, and the evidence simply does not favour materialism - yours or anyone else's.)
Evolutionary psychology: So you don't stick to your goals? Blame your kludgebrain ... or maybe not
(Excerpt: But why evolution? What happened to our stars, our parents, our societies, our religion, and our genes as the explanations for why we do not meet our goals? Oh, come to think of it, evolution is in the news right now, what with Darwin's anniversary celebrations and the Expelled film.)
Health can sometimes be fun, free, and painless: The placebo effect gets its own Web site
Take this survey: If SETI found ET, would that destroy your faith?
Prof thinks profs' intellectual sneers at public are not great TV, and he sure is right
Check your calendar ... is it still Orwell's 1984 where you live?
Science teacher symposium: Answer student questions without getting sued or fired
In some ways, bonobos (pygmy chimps) are more similar to humans than to other chimps
How fares the Expelled film? Still No. 5 - and who's ahead of it anyway?
David Attenborough, 81, to make one last film - on evolution
by Jennifer Grisolano
With a headache due to allergies, my brain isn't quite functioning today. Every news story I read sounded like the same drivel I've read before.
Which is why a little post about Iron Man seemed like it was in order. Why, you ask? Because it was a fantastic film, and if I can continue to promote it, I certainly shall.
Now, beyond the fact that Robert Downey Jr. is amazingly talent (*cough* and gorgeous *cough*), and that the script was well written, and there were great visual effects (and no gratuitous action, if you can believe it), and it had one awesome supporting cast, etc., etc., the message of the film is actually quite good. I have not read any other reviews for the film (and am certainly no real "judge" or "reviewer" when it comes to films), but at least my opinion is unbiased at the moment as I don't have Ebert or someone's opinions ringing in my head.
Basically, there is no "America is Evil" message (and they easily could have gone there). There are "good guys" and "bad guys." There is, ultimately, a message of hope - hope that people can change and reform and hope that there is such a thing as justice, and more importantly - goodness. And really, I guess that's why I don't feel so bad posting a little promo of the film on this blog because I think that notion of hope is the foundation Salvo stands on.
We have hope that by publishing a magazine like Salvo we are making a difference in this culture; changing hearts and minds one reader at a time.
...And there's my shameless Salvo plug on top of my shameless Iron Man plug.
Dinesh D'Souza's comments on animal rights ethicist Peter Singer make Ben Stein look bland. And he is getting LOTS of comments, too. (Next time I will remember to bring a feather to knock myself over with.)
The Spiritual Brain shortlisted for three Write! Canada awards
Phyllis Schlafly on the Expelled movie and why she thinks commentators hate the term "Darwinism"
Well-known Turkish creationist sentenced to jail - not ID-related, source says
David Warren on how animals differ from machines, and other topics, including bizarre fur seal sex
Was one woman who lived 150,000 to 200,000 years ago the ancestress of all of us? Science may not be sure, but pop culture is.
Part One: Our Mitochondria: A piece in the puzzle of our origins?
Part Two: What does our mitochondrial DNA say about Human Ancestry?
Part Three: African Eve - when pop culture falls in love with science
Recent Comments