I’m sure there will be plenty of interesting commentary in the coming days about last night’s (Feb 4th) much-hyped public debate between “Evolution” defender Bill Nye (The Science Guy) and “Creation” defender Ken Ham (Answers in Genesis/Creation Museum). As initial media coverage is already showing, it was a lively time. But rather than offer a political analysis of the event–I’ll do that in an upcoming piece–I want to reflect on one moment in the event when the whole thing took a deep and fascinating philosophical turn. The following discourse took place about 2 hours into the event, when the Moderator asked the following audience question to Ken Ham. There were a few good parts in the debate that stood out, but I think this is the most memorable. In my mind, this is really getting at the heart of the rift between naturalism and supernaturalism in relation to science and what counts as evidence.
Moderator: “Mr. Ham, a new question. This is a simple question I suppose, but one that is actually fairly profound for all of us in our lives. What, if anything, would ever change your mind?” Read More
In case you haven’t already heard the news, there was an important legal verdict handed down recently from the US Court of Appeals in DC having to do with net neutrality and broadband internet non-discrimination rules and regulations from the Federal Communications Commission (FCC). The case, Verizon Communications v. the FCC was challenging the FCC’s 2010 order imposing network neutrality regulations on broadband service. In short, the Court said the FCC had the right to regulate the Internet, but was using the wrong authority to do it in this case, since broadband services are classified differently than other “common carrier” services like telephone and cable TV. By all accounts, the ruling is a major victory for corporate media giants, who fought tooth and nail against any Net Neutrality restrictions in the first place, and a huge blow to Internet freedom for the average Jane or Joe. So why does the Court of Appeals ruling have so many internet activists and consumer safety advocates panicking, while folks at free market think-tanks like the American Enterprise Institute (AEI) are celebrating? In short, it has to do with choice and profits–who chooses and who profits. Read More
Posted by Chris Crews on Monday Jan 13, 2014 Under journal
So it’s that time of year again, when we are in between Xmas and February, when I seem to inevitably make a visit back to my birth state of Ohio. This inevitably involves hanging out with family in Columbus, staying with friends in Cleveland, and occasionally making a trip back to my old stomping grounds and former home in Athens. This year I got to do all of that plus add a family trip and wedding in Tulsa to the list. So that means it is time to once again reflect on another new year.
I have found over the years that making New Year’s resolutions is mostly a waste, at least for me. First of all, I don’t really put much faith in resolutions of this kind. Secondly, I find just doing something, rather than making a resolution about how I want to do something, is usually a better recipe for success in life. But this year is a little different, or at least it feels that way. Here’s why.
One of the personal dilemmas I’ve been wrestling with has to do with my future, and specifically trying to complete my dissertation so I can get my doctorate. But more than that, as I get older, I find myself less interested in always moving around and really want to be able to settle down in one place. Not that I am not still restless or want to travel, that is not the issues. Rather, I want to be able to plant a garden and fruit trees and put in a fish pond. I want to be able to get to know a place intimately. I want a community of people to share and play and laugh with. But it’s really hard to do that when you are stuck in the transitory status of a 30-something, single, ABD PhD student living in an apartment in Brooklyn while working various part-time jobs to make ends meet and keep the rent covered while trying to plan for an unknown future. This gets really tiresome, no matter how much of a home body I am. Read More
So while back in Ohio visiting the family I got the chance to hang out with my aunt Marjorie and talk family history. She is the official repository of all things genealogy on my dad’s side of the family. One of the things we were discussing during this most recent visit were a series of newsletters that were published by my great, great-uncle, Floyd Crews known as Our Family News. These were mimeographed tracts, about 15-20 pages on average, which he published from his basement and sent to various family members around the country. Read More