| Hear the 1 minute show: | |
 |  |
Transcript of today's show:
The new Chief Astronomer for the Vatican Jose Gabriel Funes says science, especially astronomy, does not contradict religion. He believes the Big Bang Theory is the most "reasonable" explanation for the creation of the universe. The theory says the universe began billions of years ago in the explosion of a single, super-dense point that contained all matter.
Listen to the 1-minute broadcast of this story [mp3]
Comment on this story.
Sound Off: What is being said about this story from around the blogging and opinion world.
Transcript of today's show:
In Texas, the Institute for Creation Research has won initial approval to offer accredited master’s degrees in science education. Science education groups are angry that none of the approval board's vote-casting members are professionally trained in science. Even more upsetting is the fact that the master's degree program will train future teachers in creation science. Texans will have the final vote in January.
[source: The Dallas Morning News]Listen to the 1-minute broadcast of this story [mp3]Comment on this story.
Background Facts: The Institute for Creation Research
Offices: In Dallas, TX and Santee, Calif.
Annual budget: $7 million
Faculty members: four full time
Students: more than 50
Degrees: master of science degree in science education with minors in astro/geophysics, biology, geology and general science.
School: The institute runs its own graduate school that offers master's of science education degrees. Its stated mission: to "research, educate and communicate Truth involving the study and promotion of scientific creationism, Biblical creationism, and related fields."
The Institute for Creation Research Graduate School sets out its educational philosophy and beliefs on its Web site, www.icr.org.
On its philosophy: The institute says its administration and faculty are "committed to the tenets of both scientific creationism and Biblical creationism." It says the two "are compatible ... and all genuine facts of science support the Bible."
On public schools: The institute "maintains that scientific creationism should be taught along with the scientific aspects of evolutionism in tax-supported institutions."
SOME TENETS OF SCIENTIFIC CREATIONISM
•The physical universe "was supernaturally created by a transcendent personal Creator who alone has existed from eternity."
•Life "was specially and supernaturally created by the Creator."
•All plants and animals were "created functionally complete from the beginning and did not evolve from some other kind of organism."
•Evolution since creation is "limited to 'horizontal' changes (variations) within the kinds, or 'downward' changes (e.g., harmful mutations, extinctions).
•Humans "were specially created in fully human form from the start."
SOME TENETS OF BIBLICAL CREATIONISM
•The creator of the universe is a triune God: Father, Son and Holy Spirit.
•The universe was created "in the six literal days of the Creation Week" described in Genesis.
•All human beings descended from Adam and Eve.
Eugenie Scott of the National Center for Science Education:
They teach distorted science ... Any student coming out from the ICR with a degree in science would not be competent to teach in Texas public schools.
from Josh Harkinson at Mother Jones blog:
Because Baylor University is not doing enough to plumb the seas for Noah's Ark, an advisory committee of the Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board has recommended that the Institute for Creation Research be given the authority to grant Master's degrees in science education. Perhaps the training will help graduates stay employed in the Lone Star State, rather than getting fired like the state's former director of science curricula, a shameless Darwin booster.
Is Texas devolving? Not at all. According to the Institute's mission statement, it will only enroll the self-motivated, responsible student who "is more self-disciplined ('whether therefore ye eat, or drink, or whatever ye do, do all to the glory of God;' I Cor. 10:31) and takes education seriously ('And whatsoever ye do, do it heartily, as to the Lord, and not unto men;' Colossians 3:23)."
The Texas Observer reports that the same guys brought us the Creation Museum in Kentucky (see Adam frolic with the dinosaurs!), and are at work stumping for Mike Huckabee in Iowa.
Sound Off: What is being said about this story from around the blogging and opinion world.
Transcript of today's show:
Republican presidential candidate Mike Huckabee bristled when asked recently if creationism should be taught in public schools. Huckabee, one of 3 candidates who has confessed his disbelief in evolution, now asks why there is such fascination with his beliefs. He expressed frustration that he is asked about it so often, arguing with the questioner that it ultimately doesn't matter what his personal views are. "That's an irrelevant question to ask me - I'm happy to answer what I believe, but what I believe is not what's going to be taught in 50 different states," Huckabee said. "Education is a state function. The more state it is, and the less federal it is, the better off we are."
[source: Associated Press]Listen to the 1-minute broadcast of this story [mp3]Comment on this story.
from an editorial by Daniel Finkelstein in the London Times:
Huckabee contends that it doesn't matter, because he is not intending to insist that schools stop teaching evolution. But that really isn't the point.
The reason that his support for intelligent design matters is that it is ridiculous. Who wants a President of the United States who doesn't accept the basic principles of science, taking refuge instead in a load of mumbo jumbo?
The religious beliefs of a President are a matter of conscience, but intelligent design is not a religious idea. It is, deliberately, put as an alternative scientific theory. But it is, sadly, nonsense.
It is clearly vital that he or she be someone who accepts and understands scientific methods. By rejecting evolution in favour of intelligent design Huckabee illustrates that he does not reach scientific conclusions based on evidence.
This is a serious downside in a President, whatever his other qualities.
from the blog Uncommon Ground:
Huckabee wants to avoid the issue, because “I'm not planning on writing the curriculum for an eighth grade science book.” He seems to think that it's irrelevant that his personal beliefs contradict an overwhelming body of scientific evidence. And don't think he can escape by arguing that he's a theistic evolutionist, a la Mitt Romney. He clearly doesn't accept the idea of common descent. He clearly doesn't understand that he shares a common ancestor with chimps and gorillas (and fruit flies and fungus and sunflowers, for that matter). It is dangerous to have someone so resistant to evidence and reason as President of the United States. [read full blog post]related news story, Huckabee Declines Theology Discussion, published December 7, 2007 by the AP:
Republican presidential candidate and Baptist preacher Mike Huckabee says he won't discuss "intricate, nit-picky things of church doctrine," such as the role of women in the ministry, because the issues aren't relevant to the presidency.
The former Arkansas governor said that while he's open to discussing the basic pillars of his faith - and praised rival Mitt Romney for opening up in a speech Thursday about his - he won't voice his views on the often-discussed controversies in Southern Baptist denominations.
"I think (discussing faith) is an important part of helping people get to know the candidates," Huckabee said Friday morning after a breakfast fundraiser in Charlotte. "(But) sometimes the questions get a little laborious when they start asking you about intricate, nit-picky things of church doctrine that's probably not all that relevant to being president."
As in his decision not to discuss his views on the creation of the earth, Huckabee passed on a chance Thursday night explain his views on whether women should be able to serve in pastoral leadership roles.
"It's so irrelevant to being president that I wouldn't even get into that," Huckabee said before meeting with about 350 supporters in Greensboro, N.C. "Churches have different views on that and my personal views are completely immaterial as it would relate to being president." [read complete article]
Sound Off: Science & Faith. Our point/counterpoint regulars Shelley (the voice of science) and Peter (the voice of faith), comment on the story. 
Transcript of today's show:
A Kentucky scientist is furious at the state visitor bureau for it's favorable description of the controversial Creation Museum. The bureau's tourism web site praises the museum as an alternative to natural history museums "that turn countless minds against Christ and Scripture."
Daniel Phelps, president of Kentucky's Paleontology Society, who calls the museum and 'anti-museum', is speaking out against the visitor bureau's actions. He says: “Natural history museums don’t turn people against religion. If they did, there would be regular protests outside those museums.” [source: The Cincinnati Enquirer]
Editor's Note: Within days after this story originally broke, changes were made to the descriptions of the Creation Museum on both the Northern Cincinnati and the Northern Kentucky tourism web sites. Both web sites have removed the phrase "This 'walk through history' museum will counter evolutionary natural history museums that turn countless minds against Christ and Scripture."
Phelps review of the Creation Museum
The rebuttal of the Creation MuseumListen to the 1-minute broadcast of this story [mp3]
The Voice of Faith: Peter Williamson, M.Div., comments:
This is much ado about nothing. The Northern Kentucky Convention & Visitors Bureau simply picked up copy from the Creation Museum’s website and quoted it word-for-word, as they likely do for all businesses they feature on their website. This certainly doesn’t mean that the publicly funded Convention & Visitor’s Bureau is suddenly endorsing creationist belief nor that the Bureau is calling those who attend natural history museums “non-believers”. This is just another example of scientists so threatened by another point of view they have to lash out about any misunderstanding no matter how miniscule.
Transcript of today's show: Sound Off: Science & Faith. Our point/counterpoint regulars Shelley (the voice of science) and Peter (the voice of faith), comment on the story. 
Despite repeated complaints, bookstores at the Grand Canyon are still selling a book that claims the canyon was created by the biblical flood. The National Park Service has stonewalled for 4 years on a promise to pull the book from the shelves. Its officials claim that a broad range of viewpoints should be available to visitors. But park rangers adamantly disagree. They say that selling the book is simply a veiled endorsement of creation theory. [source: San Francisco Chronicle]Listen to the 1-minute broadcast of this story [mp3]
The Voice of Science: Shelley Greene, Ph.D., comments:
Another conservative Christian agenda slips innocently enough through a seemingly innocuous national agency. How did this happen, we ask in astonishment? I can hear Bush now, sitting around the Crawford ranch with his posse after a day of fishin' and cyclin': "Hey boys, why don't we get some of those Christian biblical flood stories into the bookstores of some of them national parks out west here? You know, written by some scientists of our persuasion. None of them Bible books with cartoon drawing, but those science-lookin' books. They got a lot of them now. Good way to get the word out. And the Christians will love these books! Buy 'em up by the case. What do they want with those big serious science books that say the earth's millions of years old? We have a responsibility to our people. Especially when they come to a government place. We need to get the truth out there. It's good for the people, it's good for us. I'm not just a war president, I am a God president. Got to get the word out. You know what to do boys, and don't let those liberal, a-religious park rangers cause you any trouble. We're on God's side."
The Voice of Faith: Peter Williamson, M.Div., comments:
The characteristic mark of America and the cornerstone of her greatness is the First Amendment right of Freedom of Religion, Press and Expression. We are a country who has taken great pride in its embrace of religious tolerance. Does that not also extend to tolerance generally? Does our tolerance apply to science? Does scientific tolerance stand beside religious tolerance, as would racial tolerance, ethnic tolerance, and social tolerance?
The National Park Service is 'stonewalling' because what they are being asked to do flies in the face of the First Amendment right of press, as well as our national commitment to tolerance. Singling out one book among many whose viewpoint differs on ideological grounds is the behavior we would expect from a dictatorship. Removing this book from the National Park bookstore would set a disastrous precedent and would be a tremendous insult to American values, rights, and democracy itself.
Transcript of today's show: Sound Off: Science & Faith. Our point/counterpoint regulars Shelley (the voice of science) and Peter (the voice of faith), comment on the story. 
In a follow-up to a previous story about a Muslim creationist coffee table book appearing in France earlier this year, US college professors are seeing the same Atlas of Creation in their mailboxes this week. The Atlas claims that evolutionists are responsible for fascism, communism and terrorism. Professors across America are wondering who financed the one hundred dollar 800 page book and why they received it? [source: New York Times]Listen to the 1-minute broadcast of this story [mp3]
The Voice of Science: Shelley Greene, Ph.D., comments:
A letter to the author of Atlas of Creation:
Dear Mr. Harun Yahya,
Or shall I call you Adnan Oktar, which your web site tells me is your birth name. I also see that you have a very impressive CV. Many universities in America would likely confess interest in your education and background, except that it is hopelessly peppered with Islamic fundamentalist ideology, a relentless disgust of Darwin theory, and an unusual penchant for blaming Darwin theory for the world's social, political and economic ills. Our educational system at all levels tries to respect America's embrace of equal opportunity in employment, but I dare say there are some biases that you just couldn't get around or charm your way out of.
Not that your purpose in sending thousands of your big and very pretty books to our universities was to pick up a little work in the land of opportunity. You obviously don't need to. On the contrary, your gift appears to be a good will package designed to win some of us over to your side. A form of what we would call proselytizing, which can be effective, but frankly, you have to go after the ones who you think might have a teeny tiny chance of being open to your alternative viewpoints. I'm not sure you took time to research that, or perhaps you didn't care, or you have a self-confidence that would make Arnold Schwarzenegger look like a wallflower.
If I were you, I wouldn't expect a high return rate on your promotional effort. Look at France's weak response. We are just as stubborn and intractable as they are. And honestly, America does not need another variety of religious fundamentalism. The Christians are causing way too much trouble already. The introduction of Islamic fundamentalism into American society could potentially devastate our culture, educational system, and national mental health. I'm sure national cataclysm isn't what you had in mind when you took the time and expense to print and send all those books to the intellectual elite.
As a concerned American citizen, I beg you, please stay away from our children.
Sincerely yours,
S. Greene
The Voice of Faith: Peter Williamson, M.Div., comments:
As I noted when news of this book first appeared in April 2007, science cannot make faith go away. Where faith exists, secularism has no power nor sway. People of faith around the world indeed do not trust secularism because deep down inside people do not want to live in an atheistic, godless universe. I am not of the Muslim faith, yet I can understand their desire to offer the world a grander vision of life and our origins.
The Atlas of Creation is an inspiring work, and like the beauty of a cathedral, will lift the spirit of those who enter. Even those who aided and abetted the faithless in the Dover case grudgingly admitted The Atlas of Creation is truly a beautiful book. God works in mysterious ways!
When public opinion in Turkey overwhelmingly supported the authority of the Islamic Holy Koran (with roots in the Old testament), the government brought their educational policies in line. Here in America, Christian believers must endlessly contend with the ACLU, atheistic scientists, and liberal judges like Judge John Jones, who turned a deaf ear to the voice of a growing majority, and in the process, turned his back on his own Christian faith.
Today's show: Sound Off: Science & Faith. Our point/counterpoint regulars Shelley (the voice of science) and Peter (the voice of faith), comment on the story. 
In a June 2007 Gallup poll of American adults:
48% said they believe that God, in a single act, created human beings in their present form, sometime within the last 10,000 years
30% of the respondents believe in a divinely guided evolution, in which man evolved over millions of years from less advanced forms of life
13% believe that God played no part in the evolution of human beings.
[source: USA Today]Listen to the 1-minute broadcast of this story [mp3]
The Voice of Science: Shelley Greene, Ph.D., comments:
These polls reveal a dual disaster of diminished science (and excellence) standards in our schools and the strengthening tide of Christian fundamentalism in the US. Polls on this issue have been taken in America for over 2 decades. Here are what a few earlier polls have shown:
Gallup poll November 2004
34% of respondents regarded the Bible as to be taken literally
48% regarded it as divinely inspired but not always to be taken literally
15% regarded it as a collection of fables, etc., and
3% expressed no opinion.
Channel One News poll Jan 2002
Which theory should be taught in schools?
31% creationism only
17% evolution only
52% both
Gallup poll August 1999
Should creationism and evolution be taught in US schools?
68% yes
29% no
3% no opinion
Should creationism be taught instead of evolution?
40% yes
55% no
5% no opinion
Excuse me while I cry in my coffee.
The Voice of Faith: Peter Williamson, M.Div., comments:
American is, and I do hope always will be, a nation of faith. Godlessness should not be wished upon any adversary, let alone our own country. A people of faith do not have to reject science in order to embrace their beliefs. Let's be clear that looking at this issue from a black and white standpoint will only be culturally divisive and cause needless confusion in the educational system. We can make room for both. I ask the scientists to make room for faith; I ask believers to make room for science.
These poll results tell me that we are not a country yet divided in a 'culture war'. We have a heritage of pride in our diversity, and I believe we are managing to find a healthy middle ground.
Transcript of today's show: Sound Off: Science & Faith. Our point/counterpoint regulars Shelley (the voice of science) and Peter (the voice of faith), comment on the story. The Voice of Science: Shelley Greene, Ph.D., comments: Those who think they can bring religious belief and dogma into the scientific climate of a biology classroom do know better. They know they're crossing a line, and they know where that line lies. Their intent and purpose are to push that line, and push and push, budging it ever more to their benefit. Their goal is nothing less than to confuse our understanding of science and, in the cacophony, infuse their Bible-based notions as equal or superior. It would have been interesting to see the faces of Mr. Helphinstine's students when he presented slides of the Nazi cross dissolving into the Planned Parenthood logo. Are high school students sophisticated enough to know when propaganda is being thrust upon them? Let this event be a lesson to all about 1) the growing reach of religious zealotry into academia, 2) how innocuous it can appear to the unwary eye, and 3) how these educational hi jinx should be quickly and permanently dealt with. I wonder what Dembski and his friends at the Discovery Institute think when some lunatic claiming to be on “their side” stirs up a negative news story like this. The Voice of Faith: Peter Williamson, M.Div., comments: Just as critics of Mr. Helphinstine can claim him as a bizarre example of Bibilical creationism gone wild, the Nazi agenda of the Holocaust could be seen as evolutionary ideas taken to an ultimate perverted extreme. Let us be careful, in our outrage at Mr. Helphinstine, that we not gloss over the horrible history from which his ideas emerged. There are centuries of unjust, unloving, inhumane historical events that deserve our outrage. Let's put our criticism and anger where they rightly belong.
After only eight days on the job, part-time teacher Kris Helphinstine was fired from Sisters High School in Oregon. In the biology class he taught, Helphinstine referred repeatedly to the Bible and gave a PowerPoint presentation that linked evolution, Nazi Germany, and Planned Parenthood. School officials were swift in his termination. In his defense, Helphinstine said, “My whole purpose was to give accurate information and get the students thinking.” [source: New West]Listen to the 1-minute broadcast of this story [mp3]
The swift response of school officials at Sisters High School in Oregon reminds me of Judge Jones’ unequivocal response that intelligent design is indeed creationism in pseudo-scientific clothing. This tells us too, unfortunately, that classroom teachers need to be watched. The most unassuming new hire may have an agenda of zealotry lurking in their lesson plans. Our schools have by necessity become policed -- students are searched for drugs and hidden weapons; now it seems, teachers must be surveilled for surrepitious propaganda activities.
Although the appropriateness of his subject matter is questionable, Mr. Helphinstine is being quite obviously scape-goated. The information he presented -- albeit not suitable for such a young audience -- has basis in real events. Evolution theory has been an ideological cornerstone of those who favor eugenics. The nefarious Nazi philosophy was in fact based on Charles Darwin's survival of the fittest. This theory in and of itself is not villainous, but when applied by hateful atheists and those who do not believe in Christian love for one's neighbor, the theory can be twisted to diabolical ends. The Nazis erronneously believed that only they were the fittest, declaring themselves the UberMensch – the Super Race of Super Men. And did the Nazi’s control every aspect of the birthing process, killing thousands of innocent retarded and defective children? Yes, they did and they kept accurate records.
Transcript of today's show: Sound Off: Science & Faith. Our point/counterpoint regulars Shelley (the voice of science) and Peter (the voice of faith), comment on the story. The Voice of Science: Shelley Greene, Ph.D., comments: The Voice of Faith: Peter Williamson, M.Div., comments:
Yes, there were baby dinosaurs in Noah's Ark, according to Australian evangelist Ken Ham, whose Creation Musuem opens 
this Memorial Day. The Baby Dinosaurs were in the Ark because they were small enough to fit and co-existed with mankind on an Earth that is only 6,000 years old, according to Answers in Genesis, the organization responsible for the Museum opening May 28th near Cincinnati, Ohio. Source: Dylan T. Lovan/Associated Press
Listen to the 1-minute broadcast of this story (mp3)
Sure, Ken, go ahead and rewrite anthropological history. Hey, your guess might be as good as anyone elses'. Though it's too bad you don't like that carbon dating thing. I understand how it completely throws off your biblical data vis-Ã -vis the age of the earth, the time of the dinosaurs and the date of Noah's voyage. So, yeah, if the empirical tool doesn't support your theory, hell yes, throw it out! (And don't let the scientists' vehement disapproval of that practice deter you. What do they know? Most of them are atheists!).
And Ken, if you're going to ditch a precision scientific tool, carbon dating is the perfect choice: now you can date historical events to your heart's content! For a Biblical literalist, you can get a lot of mileage out of this one. Brilliant, Ken, you've done it again.
They said it couldn’t be done. By “they” I mean the godless Darwinists who claim that Biblical knowledge cannot be reconciled with science. Ken Ham has done so seamlessly, elegantly and with a child-friendly presentation. He has not left science behind, as the unbelieving naysayers insist. The quality of the exhibits and the science from which they were conceived and created rival the best natural history museums in the world. It is not what Ken Ham 'left out' that makes this museum so controversial, it’s what he has revealed -- the Gospel truth about our origins, which incidentally, hundreds of millions of Christians and Jews have accepted for thousands of years. This museum is for their edification and pleasure. And for you who cannot handle the Truth, take the kids to DisneyWorld.
Transcript of today's show: Sound Off: Science & Faith. Our point/counterpoint regulars Shelley (the voice of science) and Peter (the voice of faith), comment on the story.
Over 10,000 Christian church leaders have signed a letter 
that rejects the evangelical notions that Christians must choose between religion and science. On Sunday, February 11, one day before Charles Darwin's birthday, churches across the US participated in Evolution Sunday, celebrating that the Bible and evolution theory can co-exist. Advocates of Intelligent Design theory claim that Evolution Sunday is the height of hypocrisy. Evolution Sunday simply declares that science remain science and religion remain religion, different but compatible forms of truth. [source: The Clergy Letter Project]Listen to the 1-minute broadcast of this story [mp3]
The Voice of Science: Shelley Greene, Ph.D., comments:
Evolution Sunday is in fact a celebration of the separation of church and state. It is encouraging to see such a large number of Christians willing to think for themselves, and to embrace the idea of inclusion in place of fundamentalist 'either/or' thinking. Is there not room in God's vast creation for Darwin theory to exist?
The Voice of Faith: Peter Williamson, M.Div., comments:
Frankly, I am appalled and outraged to learn of this letter being passed around and signed so carelessly by Christians. This amounts to a flat-out rejection of the Word of the Bible. Are these Christians jumping on a liberal bandwagon or simply lacking the courage to voice and live by their convictions?
Transcript of today's show: Sound Off: Science & Faith. Our point/counterpoint regulars Shelley (the voice of science) and Peter (the voice of faith), comment on the story.
A recent BBC survey of 1,000 public figures revealed that the majority do not believe in the Bible’s story of Creation. Those polled include religious leaders, leading politicians, newspaper editors, scientists and teachers. Of the 103 church leaders who took part in the survey, only three said they believed in the literal version of the Creation, in which God created the world in six days. [source: BBC]
Listen to the 1-minute broadcast of this story [mp3]
The Voice of Science: Shelley Greene, Ph.D., comments:
This poll would seem to contradict an earlier BBC poll that stated a majority of Britains do not believe that evolution is the sole explanation for how we all got here. As I recall, this group of Brits were of moderate education and economic status. So it’s interesting to look at the dramatic 97% rejection of Creation theory by this group of higher educated professionals who hold top positions in their fields. I naturally wonder if education, life experience, and professional responsibility has any bearing on how deeply one considers questions such as the validity of the Biblical Creation story and the veracity of scientific evidence.
The Voice of Faith: Peter Williamson, M.Div., comments:
Studies such as this one are indeed very convenient for science, who most certainly consider it another ‘proof’, a vindication of their flawless grasp of truth. What do you say, however, to the carefully documented fact that more than half of those who live in civilized countries believe they did not descend from apes? These figures are indeed an ‘inconvenient truth’ for evolutionary scientists.
Transcript of today's show: Sound Off: Science & Faith. Our point/counterpoint regulars Shelley (the voice of science) and Peter (the voice of faith), comment on the story.
In May 2007, Australian evangelical Ken Ham will open a 47 acre museum completely oriented around stories from the Old Testament. Here you will see actual exhibits, including Noah’s Ark, depicting the earth’s creation. The flamboyant, outspoken Ken Ham describes his museum as a wonderful alternative to the evolutionary natural history museums that are, quote: “turning countless minds against the gospel of Christ and the authority of the Scripture.” [source: Answers in Genesis]Listen to the 1-minute broadcast of this story [mp3]
The Voice of Science: Shelley Greene, Ph.D., comments:
Our good friend Webster defines museum as "A building, place, or institution devoted to the acquisition, conservation, study, exhibition, and educational interpretation of objects having scientific, historical, or artistic value. Mr. Ham's creation museum will certainly be artistic, but in no way will offer scientific nor historical meaning. I do hope that school children are not brought to this museum under the guise of a science or history field trip. What a great disservice that would be to the integrity of our kid's science education.
The Voice of Faith: Peter Williamson, M.Div., comments:
The real story -- the true story -- of our origins and history need to be told. I applaud Ken Ham for his grand and bold depiction of the stories and events that have been supressed far too long by atheistic science. This museum is an outstanding vehicle for proclaiming the inspiring truth of the Bible, and I pray that it spread the word to countless thousands and contribute to the transformation of our society.
Transcript of today's show: Sound Off: Science & Faith. Our point/counterpoint regulars Shelley (the voice of science) and Peter (the voice of faith), comment on the story.
Intelligent Design enthusiast and former actor Kirk Cameron is busy promoting a new board game he co-authored. The game pits evolution believers and non-believers against one another in a competitive battle for brain power. Players of the game are represented with a small rubber brain and compete for brain cards. Although Intelligent Design is a strictly secular theory, evangelical Christian Ken Ham praises the game for revealing the bankruptcy of evolution and proclaiming biblical authority. [source: Living Waters]Listen to the 1-minute broadcast of this story [mp3]
The Voice of Science: Shelley Greene, Ph.D., comments:
So you ID guys are not relentlessly dull and serious after all. Apparently the Great Designer endowed you with a gene or two of humor. I’ve seen your cute little computer game somewhere on the Discovery Institute website, where the player (your think tank) shoots down pandas. Don’t worry, no offense taken. We’ve all got to laugh once in a while about our differences, lest we devolve into sullen warriors fighting for our cause. This is great guys, I mean it!
The Voice of Faith: Peter Williamson, M.Div., comments:
I personally believe that children learn best when they are enjoying their learning activity. Not only will this game be a wonderful amusement for adults, I believe that its most significant application will be in the education of our children. This form of play will teach them the skills of thinking for themselves, understanding the significant differences between Creation theory and evolution, and even learning how to refute atheistic science.
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
|
The Voice of Science: Shelley Greene, Ph.D., comments:
I agree with Mr. Phelps: natural history museums have co-existed quite respectfully with the church. This is evident in the fact that they do not post any material that discounts religious belief, nor do they post propaganda slogans or displays that attack religion. Like so many who have a fundamentalist orientation to the science/religion schism, Mr. Ham believes he and his museum are under attack by the scientific community. Perhaps this fear of attack is a misinterpretation of the threat that modern science poses to Biblical cosmology generally. For example, could it be that the Old Testament stories of the origins of life (conceived during a time when humans believed the Earth was flat!), are profoundly threatened by scientific theory that posits the universe is billions of years old?