When completely unrelated animals or plants display the same engineering solution, is it reasonable to assume a blind, unguided process of selection achieved improbable outcomes multiple times? Is calling it "convergent evolution" meaningful? Here are three examples.
The race continues between scientists desperately seeking a rationale for harvesting human embryos and those who say, having adult stem cells and iPS cells available, they are unnecessary – and their use is unethical.
Inscriptions are rare but valuable artifacts in archaeology. Though short and simple, a fragmentary inscription on a jug sets a record as the oldest ever found in Jerusalem, from the era of David and Solomon or before.
Compare two countries: in one, when their hegemony is threatened, evolutionists plead for academic freedom. In another, they deny it to those who want a chance to debate evolution.
Science news sites are talking about the evolution of human throwing, but it's mostly speculation based on prior faith in Darwinism. The real story is good design in the human shoulder.
More evidence has been presented for a "voluminous" flood on Mars, where there is no water today. So why is a comparable flood disfavored for Earth, where water covers 70% of the surface?
News sites are celebrating a "spectacular" new record for fossil DNA, claiming horse genes found in permafrost are 700,000 years old, placing the common ancestor two million years earlier than thought.
Celebrating gay marriage is not the only leftist position frequently advocated by secular science news sites. They follow party-line liberal views with few exceptions, and now openly advocate leftist ideas.