Could Monkeys Write Shakespeare?

Could Monkeys Write Shakespeare


Can I fly?  Can a duck shoot a shotgun?  Is a bike still a bike without wheels?


I could list a bunch of other stupid questions but this one has more importance.


For some time now the evolutionary proof involving random typing by monkeys in an attempt to recreate Shakespeare’s works has been ongoing.  The basic idea is that enough monkeys with enough time and enough chances could produce the same works as Shakespeare. 


Enter this story on BBC.COM:

“Virtual monkeys write Shakespeare

continue reading

The Evolution of March Madness: How Come Talent is “God Given” When there is no God?

The Evolution of March Madness Evolution:

How Come Talent is “God Given” When there is no God? 

I don’t profess to be an expert on evolution or the defense of creation.  I can’t explain the mutative process and how only some mutations are passed down and some are not.  I can’t explain how natural selection, in combination with randomness and time, has produced human beings. At the end of the day, I really can’t explain why, “Evolution means that we’re all distant cousins: humans and oak trees, hummingbirds and whales.” 

What I can tell you is that most of the world that has a platform to talk about it, at least in the media, seems to reject any possibility for a creator.  Not hard to see that. 

continue reading

Interview With Rachel Held Evans

Evolving in Monkey Town is a great new book by a young evangelical author recounting her spiritual journey as she’s moved from the “all questions are answered” certainty of her evangelical youth to the somewhat more complicated, “questions are ok” place she now finds herself. It’s a great read, full of provocative insights and disturbing questions about Christianity–the sorts of things that lead many Christians of a certain age to abandon their faith. In spite of the spiritual crisis she recounts in the book, author Rachel Held Evans hasn’t abandoned her faith, just allowed it to evolve a little bit (hence the title). In this interview, she discusses some of the problems that led her to question her faith (hell, “the cosmic lottery,” etc), the damage done by “false fundamentals,” and what parts of Christianity she’d like to see evolve.

continue reading

Thomas Nagel Likes Stephen Meyer's Book

Nice.  Prominent philosopher Thomas Nagel--no friend to Christianity--names Stephen Meyer's Signature in the Cell: DNA and the evidence for Intelligent Design as one of his books of the year:

Stephen C. Meyer’s Signature in the Cell: DNA and the evidence for Intelligent Design (HarperCollins) is a detailed account of the problem of how life came into existence from lifeless matter – something that had to happen before the process of biological evolution could begin. The controversy over Intelligent Design has so far focused mainly on whether the evolution of life since its beginnings can be explained entirely by natural selection and other non-purposive causes. Meyer takes up the prior question of how the immensely complex and exquisitely functional chemical structure of DNA, which cannot be explained by natural selection because it makes natural selection possible, could have originated without an intentional cause. He examines the history and present state of research on non-purposive chemical explanations of the origin of life, and argues that the available evidence offers no prospect of a credible naturalistic alternative to the hypothesis of an intentional cause. Meyer is a Christian, but atheists, and theists who believe God never intervenes in the natural world, will be instructed by his careful presentation of this fiendishly difficult problem.

continue reading

Eugene Cho: we cannot fully grasp the infinitude of god…

Eugene Cho, a second-generation Korean-American, is the founder and lead pastor of Quest Church in Seattle and the executive director of Q Cafe, an innovative non-profit neighborhood café and music venue. He and his wife are also the visioneers of a new organization to fight global poverty called, One Day's Wages.


in our human finitude, we cannot fully grasp the infinite of god...

We can try but we cannot fully understand the fullness, majesty, and glory of God.

continue reading

It's a Dead Man's Party: Charles Darwin at 200 (Part 4)

...continued from Part 3...

Where Does the Evidence Really Point?

In January of 2004, the atheist community was stunned by a major announcement.  Antony Flew, probably the world’s most influential atheist of the last 50 years, publicly acknowledged his move from atheism to belief in God’s existence (he hasn’t embraced Christianity just yet, though).  Let me give you some perspective. Flew’s announcement is equivalent to Billy Graham calling a press conference and telling the world he is leaving Christianity.  Can you imagine the shockwaves throughout the Christian world? 
So why did this life-long atheist ditch atheism?  Flew said he “had to go where the evidence leads.”   And what was that evidence?  “I think that the most impressive arguments for God’s existence are those that are supported by recent scientific discoveries...I think the argument to Intelligent Design is enormously stronger than it was when I first met it.”  

continue reading

It's a Dead Man's Party: Charles Darwin at 200 (Part 3)

...continued from Part 2...

Wait, the Fossil Record is Evidence of Macroevolution, Right?

Of course, scientists suggest there is evidence for macroevolution.  They point to the fossil record.  They argue we have transitional forms.  These are intermediate fossils that demonstrate gradual change from one type of species to another.  Scientists hold up examples like Archaeopteryx.  Maybe you’ve seen this lizard-like-bird fossil in your biology book (if not, google it).  Supposedly, it’s a transitional form between lizards and birds.  But there’s a major problem with transitional forms in general.

A few potential transitional examples here and there are not enough.  Evolutionists need a lot more.  Darwin said so himself in Origin of the Species.  “The number of intermediate and transitional links, between all living and extinct species, must have been inconceivably great (emphasis mine).”  In other words, if Darwin’s theory is true we should find tons of transitional forms in the fossil record.  But we don’t.

continue reading

It's a Dead Man's Party: Charles Darwin at 200 (Part 2)

...continued from Part 1...

Definition #1:  Evolution is change over time. 

This definition is really general.  As we observe our world we see things changing day by day, month by month, year by year.  An oak changes as it goes from sapling to tree.  A baby changes as she grows into a toddler.  Your body changes.  Seasons change.  Clothing styles change.  Everything changes.  In this sense of evolution everything on earth evolves.  But is this a problem for Christians?  Of course not.  If this is what someone means when they say “evolution,” no problem.

Definition #2:  Evolution is the process where minor changes take place in an organism to produce new characteristics.

continue reading

It's a Dead Man's Party: Charles Darwin at 200 (Part 1)

I recently wrote an article on evolution for junior high and high school students that appeared in Clear Horizon magazine.  The article was entitled "It's a Dead Man's Party," in reference to the upcoming 200th anniversary of Charles Darwin's birth this Thursday.  I will post excerpts of the article over the next few days. 


When was the last time you went to a birthday party for a dead guy?

Here’s your chance.  On February 12, 2009, evolutionists everywhere will celebrate the 200th birthday of Charles Darwin. Darwin can’t make it but that won’t stop the celebrations that are already planned worldwide.  Yes, worldwide.  That’s one killer party.

continue reading

Cruel Logic: The Logical Slippery Slope of Evolutionary Ethics

A powerful reductio ad absurdum from filmmaker Brian Godawa:  "A brilliant serial killer videotapes his debates with college faculty victims. The topic: His moral right to kill them."

Francis Schaeffer called this logical tactic "taking the roof off."  You simply adopt the other person's point of view for the sake of the argument and carry it out to its logical conclusion.  You demonstrate the absurd world one has to swallow given the practical outworking of their argument.  And it shows them they can't live in that world. 

continue reading
Syndicate content

Bloggers in Evolution

Sign-up for the Newsletter
Sign-up for the Newsletter
Get the latest updates on relevant news topics, engaging blogs and new site features. We're not annoying about it, so don't worry.