Binary Oasis

Two recently produced resources are very insightful to help us understand the current state of the conflict between evolutionists and those that identify themselves with Intelligent Design. One, Nova’s Intelligent Design on Trial has a complete program and other resources that focus on a case in Pennsylvania where Intelligent Design was tested. Two, ActionBioscience.org released a special report with overview arguments from the Intelligent Design community and rebuttals from proponents of evolution.

I find Ken Miller’s closing statement to be particularly good:

“If Behe wishes to suggest that the intricacies of nature, life, and the universe reveal a world of meaning and purpose consistent with a divine intelligence, his point is philosophical, not scientific. It is a philosophical point of view, incidentally, that I share. However, to support that view, one should not find it necessary to pretend that we know less than we really do about the evolution of living systems. In the final analysis, the biochemical hypothesis of intelligent design fails not because the scientific community is closed to it but rather for the most basic of reasons — because it is overwhelmingly contradicted by the scientific evidence.”

My own summary (for now): The role of “Intelligent Design Theory” is to attack a theory to advance a particular philosophical/religious worldview. It’s not completely unreasonable to attack a theory without providing a testable alternative, and in fact, it seems that the attacks (or, more gently, “identification of difficulties with the theory”) have led to the strengthening of the theory of evolution.

Case in point: http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=JVRsWAjvQSg

I try very, very hard to make sure that I don’t mislead people and that I have a good understand of the truth of things.  Imagine my surprise when I read this article that suggests that there is no caffeine in chocolate.  At least at the moment, Wikipedia disagrees, though I’m not sure what to think.  Having done more research about caffeine than the average person, I’ve shared my knowledge with many people, but now I am unsure what to say about this particular factoid.

I guess this isn’t a really big deal, but it makes me ponder again just how we know things.  We have to rely on indirect evidence a great deal of the time, and sometimes that indirect evidence can be wrong.

I’ve been loving getting to know virtualization technology.  I’ve had some good success with both VirtualBox and Windows Virtual PC 2007, though I now have a hiccup: my virtualized copy of Windows (from a fresh virtual machine install) is not passing Windows Genuine Advantage.

I found a highly enlightening article on ZDNet discussing this scenario.  I’m disappointed that Microsoft hasn’t been more proactive to educate virtualization users on the licensing terms and to keep from falsely identifying these legimate copies as pirated versions.  I guess there is a path to get it validated again, but my experience has not been good thus far.  Hopefully Microsoft will get back to me.

Assuming the ZDNet article is correct, it is nice to know that Microsoft allows ”up to four copies of Windows from the same Windows license per computer,” so it doesn’t appear to be necessary to by additional copies of Windows just for virtualization.

8/24/07 Update: Well, I was able to get my virtualized copy of Windows validated after I submitted a support request, waited a few days, got a response back, and then activated it by phone with the automated phone system. I’m pushing them to give more clarity about why it was flagged as non-legitimate. (I bought the copy directly from Microsoft through my company’s corporate discount program.)

I’ve been curious for a while now what John Piper’s views are about evolution.  If I can’t find that information online or in a book, I hope to one day talk to Piper about that.  Regardless, the latest monthly newsletter at DesiringGod.org was entitled “Learn from Darwin,” so Piper and his organization at least do not have a completely hostile view of Darwin.  Following a link to another Piper sermon reveals some more interesting information, as well as some great advice from the late Clyde Kilby as concerns what we can or should do when we juxtapose our awe of the world around us with the inclination to suggest that evolutionary theory renders our lives meaningless.  (Scroll to the end of the sermon to see Clyde Kilby’s Resolutions.)

5-year-old Carolyn and I were talking about going to the park last night, though it was still around 95 deg F at that time of the evening.  I let her know that it might still be too hot to go outside.  So she looked through the window at the backyard and rebutted with “I don’t see any hotness.”

Regarding movie credits, my 5-year old daughter says this: “Credits is something that you need to wait for it to get over.”

As an experienced vi user, I found this google search method really cool (with sample search term “rattlesnake”).  Now that’s just about the coolest thing since sliced bread for me.

Ever since I heard the complete oral arguments before the US Supreme Court in a case on partial birth abortion (see here, and scroll to November 8, 2006), I’ve thought that it would be very instructive and helpful if the general public could be given easy access to the arguments made before the US Supreme Court.  In my case, I wondered why audio recordings weren’t generally available.  It looks like www.oyez.org/about gives a good summary of the history and perhaps just a taste of the reasoning behind limiting the access.

When Bill Gates talks, people listen.  Not everyone will agree with him, but his ideas on improving American education and competitiveness are good food for thought.

Couchville is the best web-based TV listings guide that I have seen.