Exams are over (until November) and it’s time to return to blogging. I wonder what I missed?
Surprisingly little, it would seem. While for the other creationist outfits that I’m more aware of the last week or two have been dominated by the continued fallout from both the Bill Nye videos and the ENCODE results, I would probably have been rather bored with the Institute if I weren’t otherwise preoccupied. They haven’t really done much on their main site, and they haven’t managed to make up for it elsewhere.
Daily Science Updates
The reason why I didn’t post anything on the Monday and Wednesday DpSUs for this week is not because I finally managed to keep to my self-enforced absence but because they never even showed up in the first place. Which is rather strange, given that the usual off period is at the beginning and ends of months.
Days of Praise
The ICR’s devotionals continued to be their usual boring selves – this is the reason why I almost never comment on them – although one recent article, How to Respond to Defamation, was at least semi-interesting. The bar is pretty low here, however.
Rhonda Forlow has started the new northern-hemisphere school year by talking about how great the Bible is and how the eye and other parts of the human body are clearly designed (because they’re complicated). She’s also taken to copying and modifying old, and not so old, articles from the main ICR website for her “Ask Dr Rhonda” posts – and no, they weren’t written by her.
Your Origins Matter
Some of the more interesting recent posts have appeared over at YOM (not that that’s saying much). One post talks about a study looking at how religious beliefs impact the crime rate, asking “Would believing in hell benefit America?” Among other problems, they forget that a morality based on the fear of hell is no morality at all.
A random video of theirs shows somebody talking about what biblical literalism means, commenting that the various old-testament punishments are cruel and shouldn’t be followed – there seems to be a small debate in the comments over this. Finally, there is an amusingly misguided two–part series of largely contextless man-on-the-street comments being picked apart. Maybe they were bored?
There was a redesign of the YOM site a few weeks ago. They now have a proper front page, an rss feed, and even timestamps on their comments! Unfortunately the changes are incremental and not the total redesign required, but if the irony is intentional then perhaps it’s worth it for them.
Acts & Facts
Obviously, it being the middle of the month, there has not been a new Acts & Facts newsletter published. As for September’s one, I saved up one final post on Johnson’s article through the exam period as backup filler. However when I found I needed to use it I read over what I had written and decided that it wasn’t really any good (you can only talk for so long about an article that basically concludes that “God has an inordinate fondness for beetles”) and did publish it. You’ll see a summary post for the full magazine as soon as I write it.
That’s a Fact
According to thatsafacttv.com, the next That’s a Fact video will appear on the 22nd, and will be called “Land Ho!” The obvious inference is that it will be about how the animals repopulated the planet after the Flood, which should be good. Assuming it appears on schedule – we never did see “Darwin’s Folly” after all – That’s a Fact is now back to fortnightly releases, as there was no new video for last week.
Jason Lisle’s Blog
I don’t think I’ve mentioned it except in passing, but Jason Lisle has his own blog, like Jeff Tomkins does. He hasn’t posted since August 17 though, so we obviously haven’t missed anything here either.
Tomkins has posted twice since I last commented on one of his pieces there and surprisingly neither of them are about Junk DNA, which you would have thought he’d have been all over. Instead his first was a repost of Human DNA Variation Linked to Biblical Event Timeline – covered here – while the second was his own take on the subject of The Tigon Continuum. In that post he revealed why this had been brought up now of all times – it turns out that a liliger (lion-liger cross) had recently been born in Russia. He doesn’t add much else beyond what has already been seen, concluding:
Evolutionists like to say that horizontal evolution is proof for vertical Darwinian evolution on a grand scale, when in reality the two ideas are actually different concepts. One is true and one is purely hypothetical with no hard proof.
A better phrasing would be to say that creationists like to dismiss anything evolutionists put forward (which wouldn’t include this story, by the way, and I’m not sure who he’s talking about) as being “horizontal evolution” – something that Tomkins also decides is synonymous with “micro-evolution” – while themselves bringing up examples like this as if they were points against evolution.
I think that’s everything. It occurs to me that I try to keep up with a lot these days – five of the above didn’t even exist when I started!