Amazon.com Widgets

Peter Woit on the multiverse as a weapon against religion

From Uncommon Descent

At Not Even Wrong, Peter Woit comments on Larry Krauss’s recent interest in the multiverse:

Today’s New York Times has an article by Dennis Overbye about Lawrence Krauss and his new book A Universe from Nothing: Why There Is Something Rather than Nothing. Much of the book is an excellent discussion of cosmology and the physics of the vacuum, but it also devotes a lot of effort to discussing the meaningless question of “Why is there something rather than nothing?” and arguing against the invocation of a deity in order to answer it. Krauss is no fan of string theory, which he regards as overhyped, but he seems to have developed an attraction to multiverse studies recently, perhaps motivated by their use in arguments with those who see the Big Bang as a place for God to hang out.

Personally I’ve no interest in arguments about the existence of God, which epitomize to me an empty waste of time. Given the real dangers of religious fundamentalism in the US though, I’m glad that others like Krauss make the effort to answer some of these arguments. I’m less happy to see him and others adopting the multiverse as their weapon of choice in this battle, since it’s a lousy one and not going to convince anyone. In the New York Times piece we’re told:

“Maybe in the true eternal multiverse there are truly no laws,” Dr. Krauss said in an e-mail. “Maybe indeed randomness is all there is and everything that can happen happens somewhere.”

Given the choice between this vision of fundamental science and “God did it” as explanations for the nature of the universe, one can’t be surprised if people go for the man in the white robes…

Well, if God exists, science follows, but if there are truly no laws, science doesn’t follow.

Climate scientist admits stealing docs from conservative think tank

Theft, deceit and outright lies: How ugly can climate science get?

Prominent climate scientist Peter H. Gleick relied on deceit and subterfuge to solicit a cache of sensitive internal documents from conservative think tank The Heartland Institute before leaking them to the press — a fresh scandal that further darkens the highly charged debate on planetary climate change.

Gleick — an internationally recognized hydroclimatologist and author of the respected annual report “The World’s Water” — said he received an anonymous document in the mail that tipped him off to what he described as Heartland’s efforts to muddy public understanding of climate science and policy. He released the documents to expose their work “to cast doubt on climate science.”

In his blog on the Huffington Post, Gleick publicly confessed to deceitful tactics that he described as a serious ethical slip.

Read more: www.foxnews.com/scitech/2012/02/21/climate-scientist-admits-stealing-docs-from-conservative-think-tank/#ixzz1n3JdTnHo

H/T to www.uncommondescent.com/intelligent-design/climate-alarmists-caught-again/

Professor John Lennox — The Word of God in Creation MP3s

MP3 Part 1
MP3 Part 2
MP3 Part 3
MP3 Part 4

More evidence of Darwinism’s demise?

From a peer-reviewed paper (source here).

Biological Theory
Volume 6, Number 1, 89-102, DOI: 10.1007/s13752-011-0007-1

The Fate of Darwinism: Evolution After the Modern Synthesis

David J. Depew and Bruce H. Weber

Abstract: We trace the history of the Modern Evolutionary Synthesis, and of genetic Darwinism generally, with a view to showing why, even in its current versions, it can no longer serve as a general framework for evolutionary theory. The main reason is empirical. Genetical Darwinism cannot accommodate the role of development (and of genes in development) in many evolutionary processes. We go on to discuss two conceptual issues: whether natural selection can be the “creative factor” in a new, more general framework for evolutionary theorizing; and whether in such a framework organisms must be conceived as self-organizing systems embedded in self-organizing ecological systems. (Emphasis added.)

Alleged The Movie

Website. Trailer…

Nice…

From here.

Lee Strobel: We’re on Cusp of Golden Era of Apologetics

A must-read for budding and established apologists here:

All of these trends have awakened a sleeping giant – Christian apologetics, or the defense of the faith. We’re seeing apologetics books on the New York Times bestsellers list. Schools like Biola University and its Talbot School of Theology, which are leaders in apologetics, are filled to capacity. Denver Seminary is launching a new degree in Christian Apologetics and Ethics this fall. One organization is seeking to place apologists on 500 college campuses in the next five years.

Evolutionist Hypocrisy

William Dembski Interview

Get it here: www.thebestschools.org/blog/2012/01/14/william-dembski-interview/

I love Dembski. He is an intellectual genius, and honest to the heart. With the persecution he has faced both inside and outside the church, he is also like a modern Galileo.

Happy Birthday, Dr. Hawking

From here.

Oh blast, we missed his 70th by a couple of days. Oh well, check out this video of “God and Stephen Hawking: Do the Laws of Physics Make God Unnecessary?” which was presented by Prof. John Lennox, Professor of Mathematics at Oxford University, here in Seattle back in August. Lennox spoke at University Presbyterian Church, sponsored by Discovery Institute.

Key Figures in Intelligent Design Measure the Impact of Discovery Institute

The podcast is here: intelligentdesign.podomatic.com/entry/2011-12-12T16_36_18-08_00

Don Johnson’s Programming of Life

From Programming of Life here.

Protein Synthesis

Protein Synthesis from Vuk Nikolic on Vimeo.

A great Christmas present for all ages

Available here in New Zealand or from Amazon here:

Frank Turek Interview with William Lane Craig

From here.

Frank Turek interviews William Lane Craig at Southern Evangelical Seminary’s National Conference on Christian Apologetics. Dr. Craig speaks on his experience with the Reasonable Faith tour in the UK.

Scientist who said climate change sceptics had been proved wrong accused of hiding truth by colleague

It was hailed as the scientific study that ended the global warming debate once and for all – the research that, in the words of its director, ‘proved you should not be a sceptic, at least not any longer’.

Professor Richard Muller, of Berkeley University in California, and his colleagues from the Berkeley Earth Surface Temperatures project team (BEST) claimed to have shown that the planet has warmed by almost a degree centigrade since 1950 and is warming continually.

Published last week ahead of a major United Nations climate summit in Durban, South Africa, next month, their work was cited around the world as irrefutable evidence that only the most stringent measures to reduce carbon dioxide emissions can save civilisation as we know it.

It was cited uncritically by, among others, reporters and commentators from the BBC, The Independent, The Guardian, The Economist and numerous media outlets in America.

The Washington Post said the BEST study had ‘settled the climate change debate’ and showed that anyone who remained a sceptic was committing a ‘cynical fraud’.

But today The Mail on Sunday can reveal that a leading member of Prof Muller’s team has accused him of trying to mislead the public by hiding the fact that BEST’s research shows global warming has stopped.

Prof Judith Curry, who chairs the Department of Earth and Atmospheric Sciences at America’s prestigious Georgia Institute of Technology, said that Prof Muller’s claim that he has proven global warming sceptics wrong was also a ‘huge mistake’, with no scientific basis.

Prof Curry is a distinguished climate researcher with more than 30 years experience and the second named co-author of the BEST project’s four research papers.

Her comments, in an exclusive interview with The Mail on Sunday, seem certain to ignite a furious academic row. She said this affair had to be compared to the notorious ‘Climategate’ scandal two years ago.

Read more at DailyMail.co.uk

Historian: Fool or coward? For Dawkins, that is not an easy choice

From here.

Further to “Dawkins speaks: Why he won’t debate William Lane Craig … Craig advocates “ genocide”

In “Richard Dawkins is either a fool or a coward for refusing to debate William Lane Craig” (The Telegraph, October 21, 2011), historian Tim Stanley offers,

He likes to pick fights either with dunces (like the deliciously silly and obviously gay Ted Haggard) or with incredibly nice old Christians with no fire in their belly (like Rowan Williams). Dawkins has gotten away with his illiterate, angry schtick for so many years because his opponents have been so woolly. This is a damning indictment not only of him, but of the clerical establishment of Great Britain. But this time, he understood that he was up against a pro. In America, evangelicals have to compete in a vibrant, competitive marketplace of different denominations. That breeds the very guile and theatricality that are so sorely lacking among the Anglican clergy. In Craig, Dawkins met his match. Like Jonah, he was confronted by the truth and he ran away.

Stanley provides critical context for Craig’s treatment of Old Testament slaughters.

Craig’s purpose in writing this piece is to unravel the paradox of a moral Bible that also includes lashings of apparently random violence. Craig stresses that these passages of the Bible are difficult for us to read because we are not of the age in which they are written – they are just as alien to us as Beowulf or the Iliad. That’s because Christian society has been shaped by the rules of life outlined in the New Testament, not in the section of The Bible in which this massacre occurs. Far from using this passage to celebrate the slaughter of heathen, Craig is making the point that the revelation of God’s justice has changed over time.

Which is pretty much the standard view.

It’s hard to figure out why Dawkins, who holds forth regularly on religion, would not know that. Or …

God and Stephen Hawking: Do the Laws of Physics Make God Unnecessary? A Lecture by Prof. John Lennox of Oxford University

In his best-selling book The Grand Design (2010), physicist Stephen Hawking advanced the startling claim that the laws of physics make God unnecessary for the creation of the universe. Watch Oxford University Mathematics Professor John Lennox respond based on his own new book God and Stephen Hawking: Whose Design Is It Anyway? Regarded by some as a new C.S. Lewis, Prof. Lennox has successfully debated leading atheists such as Richard Dawkins and Christopher Hitchens and has lectured at universities around the world.

You might also want to check out Lennox’s new books Seven Days that Divide the World: The Beginning According to Genesis and Science and Gunning for God: A Critique of the New Atheism.

William Lane Craig UK tour (coming soon…)

Gutless pathetic atheists: A.C. Grayling, Polly Toynbee, Richard Dawkins

H/T to www.beretta-online.com/wordpress/