A gentleman wanted to illustrate the scale difference in size between an electron and proton inside a hydrogen atom, as well as the scale distance between the two. Scaling the electron to one pixel in size, the result is a proton 1000 pixels wide and a web page 11 miles wide (on 72 dpi monitors). And that is only covering the diameter of the electron's path.

Fascinating.

Labels: science

Wow, is Ben Stein really going to take the cause of Intelligent Design to the big screen? Sure looks that way, in a Michael Moore type fashion. Expelled is set to hit theaters (I have to wonder if it will make it that far) February 12, 2008, one year short of Darwin's 200th birthday.

Via: The Heidelblog

Labels: science

I love this guy.

Alvin Plantinga, one of the leading thinkers in Christian philosophy and apologetics, deconstructs Richard Dawkins' latest book The God Delusion:

So why think God must be improbable? According to classical theism, God is a necessary being; it is not so much as possible that there should be no such person as God; he exists in all possible worlds. But if God is a necessary being, if he exists in all possible worlds, then the probability that he exists, of course, is 1, and the probability that he does not exist is 0. Far from its being improbable that he exists, his existence is maximally probable. So if Dawkins proposes that God's existence is improbable, he owes us an argument for the conclusion that there is no necessary being with the attributes of God—an argument that doesn't just start from the premise that materialism is true. Neither he nor anyone else has provided even a decent argument along these lines; Dawkins doesn't even seem to be aware that he needs an argument of that sort.¹

[1] Christianity Today.

Labels: philosophy, science