Tag Archives: Science

Robin Collins explains why fine-tuning is necessary for life

A short video from Lee Strobel’s DVD “The Case for a Creator”.

Actually, that WHOLE DVD is available on YouTube if you want to watch it. Here’s the playlist. There is a lot more about the fine-tuning argument in that DVD.

Fine-tuning of the gravitational force

I actually wrote about the fine-tuning of the force of gravity, which is mentioned in the clip. I link to an article from the New Scientist in the post to show that the fine-tuning argument is quite mainstream.

You can read more about the fine-tuning of the gravitational force from Robin Collins, who is the best we have on the topic. Collins started a Ph.D in Physics at the University of Texas at Austin, but ended up completing a Ph.D in philosophy at Notre Dame, under Alvin Plantinga, the greatest living philosopher today, in my opinion. I heard Collins speak at the Baylor ID conference in 2000.

Other DVDs on design arguments

Actually, I prefer the Unlocking the Mystery of Life and The Privileged Planet DVDs, instead, especially for people who want more detail.

Scientist quits American Physical Society over “global warming scam”

A prominent scientist has resigned from the American Physical Society and written a letter that exposes how scientific organizations suppress dissent and honest inquiry.

The author is Harold Lewis, Emeritus Professor of Physics at the University of California, Santa Barbara.

This was posted on Watts Up With That. (H/T ECM)

Excerpt:

When I first joined the American Physical Society sixty-seven years ago it was much smaller, much gentler, and as yet uncorrupted by the money flood (a threat against which Dwight Eisenhower warned a half-century ago).

Indeed, the choice of physics as a profession was then a guarantor of a life of poverty and abstinence—it was World War II that changed all that. The prospect of worldly gain drove few physicists. As recently as thirty-five years ago, when I chaired the first APS study of a contentious social/scientific issue, The Reactor Safety Study, though there were zealots aplenty on the outside there was no hint of inordinate pressure on us as physicists. We were therefore able to produce what I believe was and is an honest appraisal of the situation at that time. We were further enabled by the presence of an oversight committee consisting of Pief Panofsky, Vicki Weisskopf, and Hans Bethe, all towering physicists beyond reproach. I was proud of what we did in a charged atmosphere. In the end the oversight committee, in its report to the APS President, noted the complete independence in which we did the job, and predicted that the report would be attacked from both sides. What greater tribute could there be?

How different it is now. The giants no longer walk the earth, and the money flood has become the raison d’être of much physics research, the vital sustenance of much more, and it provides the support for untold numbers of professional jobs. For reasons that will soon become clear my former pride at being an APS Fellow all these years has been turned into shame, and I am forced, with no pleasure at all, to offer you my resignation from the Society.

It is of course, the global warming scam, with the (literally) trillions of dollars driving it, that has corrupted so many scientists, and has carried APS before it like a rogue wave. It is the greatest and most successful pseudoscientific fraud I have seen in my long life as a physicist. Anyone who has the faintest doubt that this is so should force himself to read the ClimateGate documents, which lay it bare. (Montford’s book organizes the facts very well.) I don’t believe that any real physicist, nay scientist, can read that stuff without revulsion. I would almost make that revulsion a definition of the word scientist.

So what has the APS, as an organization, done in the face of this challenge? It has accepted the corruption as the norm, and gone along with it.

If you read the rest of the letter, you will find that the the author lists specific cases where dissent was squashed by the global warming alarmists. He suspects that the reason was money – scientists have to “discover” what the government wants them to discover, in order to create a crisis that requires… more government control.

The letter was posted at the UK Telegraph and has over 800 comments!

William Dembski and Michael Shermer debate live online Thursday

Here at Challenge Washburn’s web site.

Details:

Evolution or Design: Does science provide evidence for a Designer?

Thursday, October 7 @ 8-10 PM EASTERN TIME

Washburn University Memorial Union (Washburn Room A/B)

Dr. Michael Shermer vs. Dr. William Dembski

Come join us and bring a friend as these two scholars debate one of the the foundational questions of reality and faith! …or

Watch LIVE right here at challengewashburn.com

Their time is 7-9 PM, but I think they are on Central Time, so I put 8-10 PM Eastern Time.

It looks like you can WATCH THE DEBATE ONLINE at their web site.