For the meeting on November 18, we’ll be reading a short article from the Journal of Creation.
The article is only a page long (although it prints out onto 2 pages). It is available on the Web, “The FOXP2 gene supports Neandertals being fully human“ and also as a PDF of the original publication which might print out better.
Feel free to bring other perspectives you might have on humanoid fossils and “early” human civilizations for discussion.
Oooooooh, now you really want to come to our group, don’t you?
I found this article on the BeThinking.org website. Be warned that I had a little trouble with the pdf file, so I’ve got some copies of the handout you can get from us if you aren’t able to print your own.
Christianity, Space and Aliens (Williams 2004)
http://www.bethinking.org/culture-worldview/christianity-space-and-aliens.htm
This intriguing article which addresses a variety of secular and Christian views about alien intelligence, makes use of popular culture references from books and film to illustrate how we can have a godly and rational discussion about non-human created life. Personally, as I have become increasingly frustrated with conspiracy theories, reactionary responses, and gullible folks of both Christian and non-Christian types, I think this is a really important position piece.
Let’s talk about aliens. Wednesday Sept 30, 7 pm, at Troy & Jody’s place. If you need a copy of the article or instructions to their place, get in touch with us.
Categories: Astronomy · Debate · Design · Readings · Universe
Our first meeting since the spring: Wed, Sep 16, at Troy & Jody’s house.
We have two readings on the table. Please read either one or both before Wednesday and come with your comments, critiques, and responses.
Both of these are short briefings from the Journal of Creation.
First, ‘Migrating Planets and Migrating Theories (Spencer 2007).
http://creation.com/images/pdfs/tj/j21_3/j21_3_12-14.pdf
This article summarizes theories of planet formation, and some of the problems with those theories.
Second, “Youngest and Brightest Galaxy … or Is It?” (Hartnett 2008)
http://creation.com/images/pdfs/tj/j22_2/j22_2_11-12.pdf
Reported observations of the Hubble telescope are put into context and explained, while pointing out that the new data is still hardly understood — so grand pronouncements either by secular or Christian astronomers are maybe premature.
These two are really short, but if you don’t have time to read them both, please at least skim the one which interests you the most! That will give us all something to share and discuss on Wednesday.
If anybody needs a paper copy of the articles before Wednesday, please get in touch with us (kristac at shaw dot cee eh will do). I did make spares.
The poll below is my first attempt within WordPress. I think you can only answer once, you will not be able to change your answers. If you want to look at the reading choices, use the links below the poll to go there, before voting.
These are articles from the Journal of Creation (see the Go There links in the right hand sidebar for the journal homepage).
Astronomical troubles for the astronomical hypothesis of ice ages (4 pages + references). Planetary wobble, kilo-year cyles, and north-south pole out-of-phase cooling cycles. How much change is there in how solar radiation affects the earth? How many ice ages have taken place? Can deep-sea cores be trusted, and what do their sediments show of ice age history?
Migrating planets and migrating theories (3 pages) If planets coalesce from proto-solar discs, then why are planets in our system significantly different than those around other stars? Did planets in our system form with different methods from each other? Do planets migrate in to collapse in the sun, or migrate outward to stable orbits? Or both?
Days 1–4 : Viewpoint on Genesis (7 pages + references) This article is the longest, but much less technical than the first two. Provides a stripped down outline of the first four days of creation Biblically, with some scientific perspective on the implications of the separate projects on each day. The viewpoint takes some radically different definitions than the ‘classical’ literal model, but still attempts a literal application.
Categories: Astronomy · Bible reliability · Geology · Readings · Universe
Questions About Design is ch.10 in Michael Behe’s book, Darwin’s Black Box.
Topics in this chapter include a review of the history of design ideas, including Greek thought, Paley, Dawkins, Hume, and others. Behe responds to current and media criticism of the “argument from design” for the existence of God. Discussions include genetics and morphology, as well as philosophy. 22 pages.
A copy will be available to pick up in the KCC office.
NOTE about this week’s meeting.
Krista & Loen will have just returned from holidays, so we don’t feel like cooking for you lot. Please bring some munchie you want to share. Nothing fancy required, chips or cookies or some veggies & dip is totally great. In case Troy decides to join us, no nuts please. Going pot-luck means we can meet twice in September!
Categories: Complexity · Design · Evolution · Readings
We’ll be reading “Issues and Methods in Apologetics” http://www.bible.org/page.php?page_id=3576 , which is chapter 4 from the “Faith Has It’s Reasons” series on bible.org.
This article is only about 7 pages, but quite dense with ideas on apologetics. We may want to read other chapters of the online book from time to time (Click on the book title at the top of the article to see the list of chapters). As you read, consider which of the four APPROACHES most appeals to your personal style of evidence, and also which of the ISSUES matter the most in the world-view decisions you make.
If you are going to print out a copy, there is a separate “printer friendly” button which opens a page without all the web elements.
Categories: Apologetics · Readings
The article to read is titled,
If SETI is Science and UFOlogy Is Not, Which Is Intelligent Design Theory?
Peter Williams uses a skeptic’s analysis of UFOlogy versus SETI as the template for examining ID theory. The suggestion is that if the criteria set out in a “science-based” skeptical magazine are acceptable criteria for distinguishing real versus fake science, then they might help us confirm or deny claims about Intelligent Design.
The article is here. Printed at full size, it is 6 pages long plus 3 pages of ‘endnotes.’
http://www.arn.org/docs/williams/pw_setivsufology.htm
Meeting at our place, sometime around 7 pm.
Jeff is going to select for us a short CS Lewis essay. Just because we all like Lewis’ writing style SO much.
Stay tuned to find out what we will be reading!
Edit:
We read Lewis’ essay on the Humanitarian Theory of Punishment (1949), in which he explores the long-term and human implications of removing punishment or “desert” from the justice system, and replacing it with concepts of cure or deterrence. We discussed some of the results of this shift in our own day, decades after Lewis wrote about it.
Categories: Apologetics · Readings
Further reading on Intelligent Design. After last week’s discussion on how various terms such as ID and the Anthropic principle are being confused and misconstrued, I think that a critique of the BBC television special may be interesting. Note that there are tons of references and links within this article.
http://www.bethinking.org/resource.php?ID=251
I think it might be easiest to read in PDF format (or print and write on it), but use the links in the online version to explore related materials.
NOTE: due to “life” intervening, our group will meet on Jun 11, a week later than our normal rotation. At that meeting we’ll plan some future dates & topics.
We skipped a number of chapters between this one and the previous Behe. While some of them are interesting, they do not perhaps lend themselves to discussion as much. Feel free to read the other chapters.
Here’s a discussion question related to this chapter. Terms such as “Creation science” or creationism, “anthropic principle,” “Intelligent Design,” and “Irreducible complexity,” seem to have variable definitions. Does it matter if “ID” is being used as an umbrella for creationist theories (and what does that mean anyways)?
See you soon!
