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.
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.
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.
Stem cells continue to show promise for dramatic healings, but reporters don't always clarify what lived or died to produce the cells. Adult stem cells inhabit all living humans; embryonic or fetal stem cells require a human death.
Whenever you hear "all scientists agree" or "we now know," it's no guarantee a finding won't be disputed years later. In the following examples, CEH focuses not so much on the content of the disputed subjects as the implications for philosophy of science.
If you thought work on human cloning and embryonic stem cell research went out of style with the discovery of induced pluripotent stem cells, watch out. The pro-cloning people, who never lost their lust for toying with human embryos, are back.
Complaints about a new diagnostic manual show that psychiatry has a long way to go before being considered a legitimate science. That hope might never be fulfilled.
The evolutionary story of extinction and the rise of dinosaurs faces challenges, but survives when the glue of imagination holds fragmentary evidence together.