Slashdot Mirror

Besides BioLogos (http://biologos.org), there are other Christian organizations which advocate conducting real science according to the scientific method, evolution and all:

http://asa3.org/ (The American Scientific Affiliation)
http://www.cis.org.uk/ (a UK organization similar to the ASA)
http://www2.wheaton.edu/ACG/ (The Affiliation of Christian Geologists)
http://bibleandscience.com/

http://truecreation.info/ has numerous references, a science advocacy site for evangelical Christians.

By the way, BioLogos's new documentary is due out this week:

http://fromthedustmovie.org/discussion/

Well, this is rich.

At this point, the creationists say that not only has speciation been observed, it is vital to the process, since it allows fewer species to have been aboard the Ark during the Flood. The IDers say that speciation does not happen and has not been observed.

The problem with this is that the Flood didn't happen, and the geological evidence is so overwhelmingly against it that it isn't even considered possible except by the absolute literalists and those that don't know better. Don't take my word for it, check out the Affiliation of Christian Geologists and the American Scientific Affiliation

Further, the premise is that there are smaller number of 'kinds' of animals and that speciation has produced the diversity of life we see today. It cannot occur at the speed required by Flood proponents. I took a look at the pages you linked to. There is no discussion of the speed of speciation, or selection pressure, or population genetics that would explain, for example, how dingoes, wolves, dogs, coyotes, and other 'dog kinds' could have come from a (small) set of dogs after the Flood. Try to run the numbers on that.

The idea that there can be this massive speciation and changes in genetic distribution, since the flood, but that this is limited to 'kinds' doesn't make sense. We can measure the distance between kinds, and if you accept reasonable rates of change (within kinds), then if you go further back, the kinds meet up into super-kinds, and as you go further back, you end up with a common ancestor. There's no logical reason (other than reliance on Biblical literalism) to limit the process like that.

I see that Wheaton does allow using Linux or Mac OS 9 or later. As a Linux user I am glad to hear that they do allow operating systems other than Windows. Its not like I actually plan to go back to college full time. But, for the sake of students there, I hope that they will continue to allow using Linux or Macintosh. With or without the latest security updates worm and virus problems are quite rare rare for most operating systems other than Windows. Here is the link to the operating sytems that Wheaton allows:

Computer systems supported by ResNet

I use Linux most of the time and only rarely use the Windows XP that is also on my computer. With both Linux and Windows I keep the security patches and virus signatures up to date. I even go so far as to use the Clam antivirus scanner for Linux and update the virus signatures regularly. I do that despite the fact that there are only a handful of Linux viruses in existence and none of those are circulating agressively in the wild. I do not know of a single Linux user who has ever been infected with a Linux virus or worm. I also use a firewall with both Linux and Windows. Of course, Linux comes with the free iptables firewall. The point is that my copy of Linux would be unlikely to be a worm/virus infested problem on their network. For Linux using students, even clicking on the wrong attachment does not lead to becoming infected.

I am not very religious but, I do not object to a private Christian college trying to block pornography and other objectionable material. If that bothers someone they could always go to a different college or access whatever they want after they graduate.

The AUP disallows all servers. Students aren't even allowed an Ethernet switch or network hub in their dorm room. One computer per outlet, one outlet per student, enforced by MAC address.

I have tried both freevo and mythtv and found that neither are exactly to my liking. Right now I use mencoder and cron to record any tv shows that I might want to watch later, and tvtime to watch tv live. I know its not a total solution, but thats not what I'm looking for: I don't have the luxury of having an extra pc to be a dedicated pvr(or for that matter a tv), thus I find mencoder does exactly what I want it to do. Are there any others out there that use alternatives to freevo and mythtv to record / watch tv? More specifically, what formats do people record to? I record to divx, does anyone record to mpeg2 and not use either freevo or myth? For anyone that is interested, here is the script I use to record with mencoder.

> Im sure you like George Bush alot, but isnt this going a little to far?

Dude; you're not using those words/abbreviations correctly.

>Heres a hint

Here's another: Don't try to use words with apostrophes unless you have read this.

>and the correct spelling is in websters dictionary

I hope you mean Webster's.

>you are practicing GW speech

Come on, you have to use the last name. You can't call him "George Washington", so don't abbreviate his name like that! It's G.B. or G.W.B. Not GW. Sorry (well, maybe not).

>Come on, how about using some strategery in your /. posts ...And sentences end with periods. Here's a free one: .

In other words: Don't bitch and moan until you're perfect!

Hmm, don't have one of my books around, but it mentioned some of the things that affect the rate of C14 in the atmosphere, and how much is absorbed.

Yes, this is well known and calibrated for. This is due to the way that C14 is formed. I believe that if you see a date written as BCE it is calibrated, whereas bce isn't (or maybe round the other way, I can't remember off the top of my head.

Are there any websites of good science lit that undergo a good peer review process? I agree that this is essential to filter rubbish.

To my knowledge there isn't (unless you belong to a university with a online subscription to a scientific journal). Your best bet, when checking up articles is head over to your nearest university and raid their library. While not peer reviewed, a academic textbook can be execellent in get a good overview of a particular field.

As for fraud from the ICR, what are you talking about? Honest mistakes? Evolution has had it's fair share of red herrings, so using that logic I could reject evolution on the basis that scientists have given fraudulant data and red herrings.

No, I'm not talking about honest mistakes. I'm talking about fraud. One on the most well known creationists, Duane Gish, has a very bad habit of having claims refuted to him, and then ignoring the refutation and making false claims to his audiences (who are ususally not particularly scientifically literate). An example of this can be found here.

Anyway, if you have any good websites on information for learning more about physics, chemistry and biology I would appreciate it. Also any sites that publish good quality science lit.

This is differcult, as you've named a pretty massive field, and whereas my chemisty knowledge is pretty good (I'm doing a PhD in it), I wouldn't the best judge on physics and biology.

But ignoring all that, here goes:

The best site on evolution and creationism from a scientific perspective is talk origins.

A site which may interest you is this one from the Christian Geologists, who find that their faith is fully compatible with science. Another interesting geogogy link is this one (it has, to my knowledge, no religon in it).

Answers In Science appears to have a ton of interesting links.

I'm not sure if this is exactly what you where after. If it's general science, then I'll have to know more about your science background to even know where to start looking.

Hope this helps.

Cheers,

Clem

You may dislike what He taught, or choose to reject it, but as C.S. Lewis said, there are only three possiblilities: Jesus was either a bad man, a mad man, or He was indeed what He claimed to be: the God-man. It's actually fairly easy to eliminate the first two, especially since people don't willingly die horrible deaths for anything less then what the *know* to be the truth. (read Fox's Book of Martyrs for a real eye-opener.) And the truth is what it's all about, now isn't it?