New Atheism and creationism

Discussion on YT’s wall:

Mother Jones Future President Ben Carson Wrote 6 Books. We Read Them So You Don't Have To.  27 January 2015 “I find it as hard to accept the claims of evolution as it is to think that a hurricane blowing through a junkyard could somehow assemble a fully equipped and flight-ready 747.”

A New Atheist remarked on “the mind-boggling ability of religion to turn otherwise intelligent people into idiots is so potent that apparently even being a trained neurosurgeon is no guarantee that one can understand the basic mechanics of natural selection.”

WH: This intelligence failure phenomenon is unfortunately not unique to religion. Consider Nobel Chemistry laureate Linus Pauling and his megadose vitamin C controversy.

The discussion turned to the infamous 1998 episode where Richard Dawkins was duped into a video interview with creationist organisation Answers in Genesis, which was deceitfully edited to give the impression that Dawkins was unable to give an example of a mutation that increased information in the genome. A creationist said that “it really is Dawkins’ responsibility to vet his interviews.”

WH: As much as I disagree with Richard Dawkins, he cannot be held responsible for deceitful editing when he consents to an interview in good faith. To do so is the equivalent of blaming fraud on the victim for “failing to do some basic research.” Rather, it is the responsibility of allegedly Christian editors to act in a manner that is compatible with Christian values.

The creationist referred to biologist RW Carter’s argument that evolution can only increase “mathematical information” (in the Shannon entropy sense) but not “biological information.”

Journal of Creation Can mutations create new information?  August 2011 Evolution requires the existence of a process for the invention of new information from scratch. Yet, in a genome operating in at least four dimensions and packed with meta-information, potential changes are strongly proscribed. Can mutations produce new information? Yes, depending on what you mean by ‘new’ and ‘information’. Can they account for the evolution of all life on Earth? No!

Ultimately, examples of evolutionary “information” increase do exist, so whether Dawkins could name them is irrelevant. Examples can be expected to arise via basic mutation modalities.

In his article, Carter's own examples of aerobic citrate metabolising E. coli and nylonase Flavobacterium easily constitute increased “biological information” under his chosen definition of “an encoded, symbolically represented message conveying expected action.” Carter's attempt to redefine these examples as "degraded information" consists of grossly false claims and puerile semantics, and bears false witness against the truth.

Homosexual parenting

Discussion on BW’s wall:
 

Breaking Christian News Adult Children of Gay Parents Unite in Court to Testify Against Same-Sex Marriage  16 January 2015

Someone supported the article, asserting that “God created man and woman to be parents together.”

WH: The question is not whether particular homosexual individuals are good parents, but rather whether homosexual people in general are good parents. Therefore, testimonies from individual cases are overwhelmingly outweighed by the hundreds of cases from scientific studies. God created reality. In reality, studies show that homosexual parents, in general, are as good as heterosexual parents.

Someone else held that marriage is “explicitly between husband and wife” and that “same-sex marriage” should be called “same-sex something else,” while attempting to claim a moral high ground of political incorrectness.

WH: Political correctness works both ways in that things seemingly “politically incorrect” may be merely “politically correct for some Christians.” Holding to a belief without regard for reality constitutes a Biblical exegesis that is contrary to the theology of the Apostles and of the Church Fathers. If your interpretation of the Bible is that the sky is green, and yet the sky is blue, I recommend reconsidering your interpretation.

If you are happy to allow homosexual marriage as long as it is “called something else” (eg, “marriaje”), do you think this is merely an issue of semantics and dictionary definitions?

Someone else pointed out that while “some Christians hate gay people,” most do not, and that such hatred is contrary to the words of Christ. 

WH: What is sent can be different to what is received. Most Christians will feel that they do not hate homosexual people. Most homosexual people will nevertheless feel hated when Christians (often out of proportion to their efforts against other societal issues) speak against their right to have marriage or to raise children.

Punctuated equilibrium versus phyletic gradualism

(Saw the original article "Liked" by a friend and couldn't resist.)

The Poached Egg How Darwin Failed His Own Test  13 January 2014 What has the past 150 years shown us about Darwin's theory of evolution?

Actually:

1. Complex precursors to Cambrian animals in fact have been found. Davis' article promotes a gross falsehood in claiming otherwise.

2. Punctuated equilibrium opposes phyletic gradualism and is a subset of Darwinism, not an antithesis. The development of species in punctuated equilibrium and in the Cambrian explosion, over hundreds of thousands or millions of years, is "fast" in geological terms, but "gradual" in biological terms, consistent with Darwinism.

Contrary to Davis' contention that the Cambrian explosion represents a falsification of Darwinism, the fossil record in fact underlies the widespread scientific acceptance of the modern evolutionary synthesis.

Christian writers have a moral responsibility of due diligence in fact-checking any messages they promulgate. Propagating false or misleading information through negligence or "stiff-necked" obstinacy constitutes an act of worship towards the "father of lies" and is incompatible with Christian values.