The SMU "Darwin vs. Design" event - 13,14 April 2007
- Intelligent design event spurs protests - Dallas Morning News article by Jeffrey Weiss 24 March 2007
- "Darwin vs. Design" at SMU -- twaddle on both sides by Jeffrey Weiss on March 24, 2007
- Darwin vs. Design presented by The Discovery Institute, a Christian think tank (now if only they would do some thinking)
- Letters in response - Dallas
Morning News 28 March 2007
(Science 0 : Pseudoscience 3)
All from very religious people. Is Intelligent Design religion? If Intelligent Design is science,
then why are so many religious people upset? I'll bet that not a single one of
the letter writers has
read Charles Darwin's Origin of Species, or has an idea what evolution means. Evolution has nothing
to say about God -- it is neutral on the God question.
- Ivory tower hysterics from The Dallas Morning News,
31 March 2007, "Hits and Misses" on the editorial page.
Who said this was going to be a "debate"? All four speakers are pro-Intelligent Design!
The name of the presentation should be changed from "Darwin vs. Design" to "Design, Design,
Design, and more Design"! Hey, Dallas Morning News, whatever happened to due diligence and
- A problem at its genesis by Lee Cullum, Dallas Morning News Opinion Viewpoints 4 April 2007.
- Viewpoint 5 April 2007 sent to the Dallas Morning News by 24 members of the SMU faculty.
- More letters to the editor Dallas Morning News 9 April 2007
(Science 1 : Pseudoscience 2)
Well, at least one was favorable to the science position this time.
- Are the Darwinists afraid to debate us? Dallas Morning News Viewpoint 10 April 2007
When you say "Darwinist" do you mean "rational thinking person"? No, we're not afraid to debate you; we're
afraid that a debate on a university campus will lend legitimacy to your nonsense. We don't debate the
AIDS deniers or the flat earthers either. ID has been defeated in science and in the courts; how
many more times do we need to fight this battle? "Life is too short to occupy oneself with the slaying of the slain more than
once." -- Thomas Huxley
- Sunday letters: SMU and evolution science Dallas Morning News 15 April 2007
(Science 2 : Pseudoscience 1)
Hey, we're ahead for once!
Comments in the SMU Daily Campus Newspaper
- Open debate in jeopardy SMU Daily Campus editorial 4 April 2007 written by
- Sarah Levy, a third year law student at SMU and president of the Christian Legal Society which invited the Discovery Institute to SMU (Thanks a pantsfull for that!) and
- Anika Smith, Press Contact for the Discovery Institute, a detail she omitted from her information at the
bottom of the article. She listed only "recent graduate of Seattle Pacific University" with an SPU email address. Are you trying to
hide something, Anika? Does ID stand for Intentional Deception?
Once again, this is NOT going to be a "debate". All four speakers are pro-Intelligent Design! But of course you KNEW this already, didn't you, ladies?
- Reply from Professor John Wise, SMU Biological Sciences
- Reply from Professor Randall J. Scalise, SMU Physics
- Freedom of Speech vs. License SMU Daily Campus letter by Professor Ronald Wetherington (SMU Anthropology) 11 April 2007
- The Discovery Institute: harming us with pseudoscience by Ben Wells, SMU Daily Campus editorial 13 April 2007
- Censorship at Darwin vs. Design conference by Ken Ueda 17 April 2007
- Darwin vs. Design conference: A perspective from one group of students 17 April 2007
- The delicate balance of free speech by R. Gerald Turner, President of SMU 17 April 2007
- New name, similar face Intelligent Design may have a theory, but it's not scientific, By: The Daily Campus Ed Board 18 April 2007
- Response to Professor Wise about Intelligent Design 18 April 2007
- No faith in ID - letter to the editor by Daniel Palos 24 April 2007
- Letter to the Editor by Christopher Strganac 25 April 2007
- Letter to the Editor by Professor John Wise 25 April 2007
- ID claims don't hold up by Professors John Wise and Pia Vogel 26 April 2007
- Why ID is false by Patrick McDonald 30 April 2007
- Rant from Casey Luskin, Esq. at discovery.org 5 May 2007
- Here's an interesting strategy: When your argument is absolutely devoid of science, attack John Wise.
- Intelligent Design is not science: why this matters by Professor John Wise 5 May 2007
- Are Darwinists Afraid to Debate? by Michael D. Lemonick - Eye on Science Blog from Time Magazine, with CNN
- Are ID Creationism Advocates Afraid to Acknowledge Past Debates? from The Austringer
- Science Professors at SMU Protest Intelligent-Design Conference - from The Chronicle of Higher Education News Blog
"And, finally, I'm thrilled that SMU is hosting this little band
of lawyers, philosophers, Christian apologists and the lone
scientist, Mike Behe, who singlehandedly lost the Kitzmiller case
for 'intelligent design' by equating, under oath, that
'intelligent design' and astrology were both scientific
concepts. Thank you, Mike, biochemist and palm reader.
I only hope they provide popcorn."
--Doc Bill, 27 March 2007
- Vacuity of ID: SMU profs upset about upcoming intelligent design conference from The Panda's Thumb
- Duty to speak out against intelligent design from Millard Fillmore's Bathtub
- The same nonsense in Knoxville, TN, 24 March 2007 debunked by Jason Rosenhouse
Comments in the Dallas Morning News