trentmkelly/rationalwiki huggingface dataset:
Evolutionary Creation: A Christian Approach to Evolution

{{christianity}}{{title-italics}}
'''''Evolutionary Creation: A Christian Approach to Evolution''''' ({{isbn|9781498250658}}) is a [[theistic evolution]] book written in 2008 by Denis O. Lamoureux.

==Overview==

Lamoureux has doctoral degrees in dentistry, [[theology]], and in [[biology]]. He is the professor of [[science]] and religion at St. Joseph's College at the University of Alberta, Canada. He also used to be a [[Young Earth Creationism|Young Earth Creationist]].<ref>[http://www.ualberta.ca/~dlamoure/ Denis O. Lamoureux Biography]</ref> 

Lamoureux in the book presents a model of "Evolutionary creation" which is a form of [[theistic evolution]]. In the book, he accepts and gives evidence for [[common descent]] and rejects [[creationism]].<ref>[http://undeception.com/review-evolutionary-creation-a-christian-approach-to-evolution/ Review: Evolutionary Creation: A Christian Approach to Evolution]</ref> According to Lamoureux, his model of Evolutionary creation shows that the [[Bible]] is not a book of science, but a God-inspired book that offers messages of [[faith]].

==Reception==

The book was written in an attempt to wake up the [[Christian]] anti-evolution audience in [[America]] to accepting the scientific evidence for [[evolution]] whilst also giving support to the Christian faith.<ref>[http://ncse.com/rncse/29/2/review-evolutionary-creation Review: Evolutionary Creation by Stephen J. Godfrey]</ref> The book has received positive reviews from [[theist]]s.<ref>[http://exeter.academia.edu/BethanySollereder/Papers/539167/God_and_Evolution_A_Review_of_Four_Contemporary_Books Book Review by Bethany Sollereder]</ref> It is still a religious book and has not been reviewed by many scientists.

==References==
{{reflist}}

{{stub|Christianity|Christianity}}

[[Category:Christianity]]
[[Category:Religious books]]
[[Category:Theistic evolution]]

Categories: Christianity, Religious books, Theistic evolution
Evolutionary biology

{{evolution}}
{{biology}}
'''Evolutionary biology''' is the study of the origin and [[evolution]] of [[species]].  Evolutionary biologists research the processes and causes of evolution and [[biodiversity]], determine relationships between species, and document the [[history]] of evolution.  Thus evolutionary biology includes the fields of [[cladistics]], [[Phylogeny|phylogenetics]], and [[Molecular biology|molecular evolution]].  Additionally population [[Genetics|geneticists]] study the causes of [[gene|genetic]] variation and [[Ecology|ecolological]] geneticists consider the effects of the environment on species.

This [[Science|scientific]] field is related to other areas of [[biology]].  To learn about past evolution [[Palaeontology|paleontologists]] examine the [[fossil record]], [[Common descent#embryology|embryologists]] study [[Evolutionary developmental biology|developmental processes]], and [[Zoology|zoologists]] learn how various animals work.  Evolutionary biologist Theodosius Dobzhansky wrote an essay titled "[[Nothing in Biology Makes Sense Except in the Light of Evolution]]."<ref>[http://people.delphiforums.com/lordorman/light.htm Nothing in Biology Makes Sense Except in the Light of Evolution], Theodosius Dobzhansky (1973), ''The American Biology Teacher''</ref>

Evolutionary biology became a recognized field of study in the 1930's when it was realized that evolution could be explained by [[Gregor Mendel|Mendelian genetics]], in a model of evolution termed the [[modern synthesis]]. Many universities have evolutionary biology departments.  Evolutionary biology has a practical application in [[Endangered species|species conservation]].

''Evolutionary Biology'' is the name of an influential textbook on the subject written by biologist Douglas Futuyma in 1942.

==Significant evolutionary biologists==
* [[Charles Darwin]]
* [[Richard Dawkins]]
* Theodosius Dobzhansky
* [[Niles Eldredge]]
* Douglas Futuyma
* [[Stephen Jay Gould]]
* Julian Huxley
* [[Jean-Baptiste Lamarck]]
* [[Richard Lenski]]
* Richard Lewontin
* Ernst Mayr
* George Gaylord Simpson
* [[Steven M. Stanley]]
* G. Ledyard Stebbins

==External links==
* {{wpa|Evolutionary biology}}
* [http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/faq-intro-to-biology.html Introduction to Evolutionary Biology] on [[Talk.origins|Talk Origins]], Chris Colby, 1/7/96
* [http://www.biomedcentral.com/bmcevolbiol Evolutionary Biology], BioMed Central
* [http://www.eseb.org European Society for Evolutionary Biology]

==References==
{{reflist}}
[[Category:Evolution]]
[[Category:Biology]]

Categories: Evolution, Biology
Ex post facto

{{sources needed}}{{law}}{{title-italics}}
'''''Ex post facto''''' is [[Latin]] for "after the fact", or, retroactively.

==In law==
It most often comes up in the context of a prohibition on ''ex post facto'' [[law]]s or enforcement of them — that is, if the law governing an activity is passed after the activity occurs, one cannot be retroactively punished. 

The most authoritative statement of this can be found in Article 11(2) of [[Human rights#The Universal Declaration of Human Rights|The Universal Declaration of Human Rights]] — "No one shall be held guilty of any penal offence on account of any act or omission which did not constitute a penal offence, under national or international law, at the time when it was committed. Nor shall a heavier penalty be imposed than the one that was applicable at the time the penal offence was committed."

So if you've done a massive amount of [[masturbating]] on Monday, and they make it illegal on Tuesday, you won't get done for it. And if they introduce the [[death penalty]] for masturbating on the Wednesday, they can't kill you for it either. The lesson here, kids, is to make sure you keep up to date with the legislative programme of the legislature(s) that has jurisdiction over you and plan your self-love sessions accordingly.

==Predictions==
''Ex post facto'' predictions (also known as ''vaticinium ex eventu'', ''[[prophecy]] [derived from] the occurrence'') are ones that are not made until the facts are available — i.e., explanations of events that sound "predictive" but are not made in advance of specific occurrences, but after them.  Similarly, claiming given events fulfill [[prophecy]] after they occur allows wide leeway in interpretation, as opposed to interpreting the prophecy before the events and accurately predicting how they will occur.

It's easy to trick people into believing you made a true prediction, when in reality it was ''post facto''. This can be done through clever misdirection and is often a trick used by [[medium]]s or other mind-readers. [[Cold reading|Cold readers]] can be quite good at getting people to reveal facts and then claiming that these facts were divined through [[psychic]] powers and were actually predicted. However, it doesn't always work. In 2009, mentalist [[Derren Brown]] attempted such a feat by "predicting" the results of the National Lottery draw. Using the same misdirection methods he uses in mental illusions and card tricks, he tried to convince the audience that he's predicted the results beforehand. However, most people seemed to see past the tomfoolery and clearly noticed that he revealed his "prediction" a few seconds ''after'' the result was shown — with the illusion being due to a camera trick.

==See also==
*[[Rule of law]]
*[[Nostradamus]]
*[[Clairvoyance]]

[[Category:Latin phrases]]
[[Category:Law]]

Categories: Latin phrases, Law
Executive power and the War on Terror

{{uspolitics}}
{{cquote|''We have always been at war with Eastasia''|||''[[Arken's Law|Nineteen Eighty-Four]]''}}
In the '''[[War on Terror]]''', it has become fashionable in certain circles to claim more and more unlimited powers for the '''[[President of the United States|chief executive]]''' of the [[United States]]. Through legislation such as the Authorized Use of Military Force Act and the [[PATRIOT Act]], [[George W. Bush]] and [[Barack Obama]] became among the most powerful Presidents in American [[history]] via broader executive powers. 

The granting of these increased powers was rationalized by the crisis of [[9/11]], and resulted in the creation of many [[Extraordinary rendition|secret detention facilities]], as well as the indefinite detention of foreign terror suspects at [[Guantanamo Bay]]. While some of these means were reduced during the Obama administration, such as the removal of "[[torture|advanced interrogation]]," [[US Senate|Senators]] and [[House of Representatives|Representatives]] (along with the [[White House]] itself) have been hesitant to undo some of the other infamous measures invoked by the Bush administration, such as Guantanamo; this is likely because of fear of [[terrorist]]s being [[NIMBY|brought into state prisons]].

And then there's the whole [[NSA]] thing.

While previous Presidents also exercised broad war powers, none topping those of [[Abraham Lincoln]] (who had to suspend ''[[habeas corpus]]'') and [[Franklin Delano Roosevelt]] (who [[Executive Order 9066|detained thousands of Japanese, German, and Italian Americans]] without [[due process]]), the advent of the [[Internet]] and other [[globalization|globalized]] technology has allowed for some of the most intruding means of surveillance by any government through the passage of the PATRIOT Act.<ref>[http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=189270786 Especially section 215.]</ref>

==See also==
*''[[Hamdan v. Rumsfeld]]'', for the "democracy-forcing" role of the [[SCOTUS|Court]].
*[[Military Commissions Act]], for the failure of the rights-based analysis.
*''[[Youngstown Tube and Sheet Co. v. Sawyer]]'', on the institutional process argument.
*[[Nothing to hide argument]] for a common defense.

==References==
{{reflist}}
{{stub|Politics}}
[[Category:Articles needing explanation]]
[[Category:Authoritarianism]]
[[Category:Government surveillance]]
[[Category:Terrorism]]
[[Category:United States politics]]

Categories: Articles needing explanation, Authoritarianism, Government surveillance, Terrorism, United States politics
Exegesis

{{religion}}
'''Exegesis''' (derived from the Greek for "to lead out") refers to a process of intense study and interpretation of a literary text. It is a subset of ''hermeneutics'', which refers to interpretation in general.

==Exegesis in religion==

Its greatest utility is in a field where entire lives can hang on the omission or misplacement of one word; namely, the study of holy books. To understand how important exacting textual analysis is in these matters, one might consider the examples of the [[Wicked Bible]] and the {{wpl|Bible errata|Fools Bible}}, where the misplacement of two words might have resulted in whole legions of faithful unwittingly going to [[hell]] in a dizzying whirl of adulterous debauchery and [[atheism]].

The scholarship required for exegesis also greatly reduces the possibility of certain parts of a text being read the "wrong way". For example, a naïve reading of [[RationalWiki:Annotated Bible/Exodus#Exodus 21:23|Exodus 21:23-25]] would suggest that it is an exhortation for people to go out and avenge themselves bloodily on anyone who does them wrong. However, exegesis will allow the reader to discover that back in those days, such quests for vengeance were a given, and the verse is in fact of an old principle known as the ''lex talionis'', which was meant to ''limit'' the scope of such quests to keep the severity of the punishment equal to the severity of the offense. This in turn makes it much more understandable when Jesus, in the Sermon on the Mount, cites these verses as justification for a categorical condemnation of revenge.

==Eisegesis==

{{cquote|Every fiction should have a moral; and, what is more to the purpose, {{wpl|Transcendentalism|the critics}} have discovered that every fiction has.<ref>Edgar Allan Poe, [http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Never_Bet_the_Devil_Your_Head ''Never Bet the Devil Your Head'']</ref>|4=Edgar Allan Poe}}

As the whole purpose of exegesis is to bring out meaning in a text that is not facially evident — and, indeed, may facially appear to contradict itself — it is very easy to read  whatever you first thought of into the text. This possibility has been heavily exploited in the arena of Biblical exegesis. When you go so far that even other Biblical scholars notice you're doing this, the proper term is "eisegesis".

The use of [[bullshit]] in exegesis is by no means restricted to Biblical exegesis. A current fashion today is to take some ideology and fashion a literary school-of-thought out of it by running the entire corpus of literature through the lens of the ideology. The transcendentalists were an early example of this tendency, as they believed that morality could be read everywhere in the world and consequently read much more meaning into works than was actually there.

==References==
{{reflist}}

{{stub|religion}}

[[Category:Literature]]
[[Category:Religion]]

Categories: Literature, Religion
Exopolitics

{{significantly problematic}}{{sources needed}}
{{ufology}}
'''Exopolitics''' is a fancy term for '''"extraterrestrial politics"''' (the Greek prefix "[[wiktionary:exo-|exo-]]" means "outside" or "external" — compare [[exoplanet]]). As no [[extraterrestrial life]] has been discovered yet, let alone extraterrestrial life capable of politics, this is the domain of [[cranks]] and 
nutjobs
 some really weird people. It's the result of what happens when beliefs progress beyond the simple fascination with [[UFO]]s ("there's no other explanation for UFOs, therefore they must be alien spacecraft") well into [[true believer]] territory ("of course we ''know'' that there are multiple alien races!").

The term has been used to denote two slightly different things — the alleged dealings of aliens with Earth politicians and the [[science fiction]]-like tales of alien wars and alliances. If this sounds vaguely familiar, both meanings form a lot of the plot of ''[[The X-Files]]''. It includes various well-known myths about [[Roswell]]/[[Area 51]] and the US government, e.g. [[Michael Salla]]'s claim that [[Eisenhower]] met aliens, and Salla's book explaining how "since at least the 1930s every major war and policy decision has been in response to an undisclosed extraterrestrial presence on Earth".<ref>Jim Marrs, publicity material for ''Exopolitics: The Political Implications of the Extraterrestrial Presence'', Michael E. Salla, Dandelion Enterprises, 9 Apr 2017, via [https://www.amazon.co.uk/EXOPOLITICS-POLITICAL-IMPLICATION-EXTRATERRESTRIAL-PRESENCE/dp/1893302563 Amazon]</ref> Salla has attempted to link [[QAnon]] to alien control of human institutions.<ref>[https://exopolitics.org/trump-and-q-on-invisible-enemy-extraterrestrial-factor/ Trump and Q on the Invisible Enemy – the Extraterrestrial Factor], Michael Salla, exopolitics.org, July 1, 2020</ref> [[David Icke]]'s [[conspiracy theory]] about [[reptilian]] aliens controlling the world is another example.

==See also==
*[[Alfred Webre]]
*[[Exotheology]]
*[[Michael Salla]]
*[[Posadism]]

== External links ==
* [http://www.exopaedia.org/Exopolitics Exopolitics], entry in the Exopedia
* [http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/esp_temas5.htm#exopolitica Exopolitics section] of [[Biblioteca Pleyades]]
* [http://exopolitics.org/ Exopolitics.org] (Michael Salla's website)
* [http://exopolitics.com/ Exopolitics.com] (Alfred Webre's website)

==References==
{{Reflist}}

[[Category:Politics]]
[[Category:Ufology]]

Categories: Politics, Ufology
Experimental control

{{Philosophyscience}}{{fun}}
An '''experimental control''', often referred to as a "control group", is a population or set of objects that is statistically similar to the set being tested, on which no changes are implemented. In [[psychology]] and [[biology]], the control group is very important, since results are often [[statistical]] rather than concrete.  For instance, in testing a drug for a malady, some percentage of the test subjects will heal with no intervention (or heal at some rate in a third group, people getting an existing remedy).  The control group yields this number, and the group getting the treatment under test can be compared to this to determine efficacy. While it is less of an issue in the physical sciences, part of the description of how to set up an appropriate experiment should always address what controls are used to limit the independent variables to the one of concern.

A control group's purpose is to make sure that any observed results are statistically related to the tests being performed, and not simply random occurrences that happen anyway. A good control group has subjects that, in every important way, resemble the experimental group, except for the difference in the experimental condition. In the case of animal studies, a control group may be siblings or twins of the experimental animals. Human medical trials often form a control group using [[randomized controlled trial|random assignment]]. In some cases, these trials have multiple control arms, in order to test combinations of several treatments or to compare differing doses. These arms can be control groups for some comparisons and experimental groups for other comparisons. In order to assure that the carrier of a substance being tested is not having an effect, sometimes the control group will receive a saline injection (in the case of injection drugs) or be put in an inhalation chamber (e.g., in the case of rodent toxicology studies on gases); these are known as vehicle controls.

When the possibility of [[Experimenter bias|experimenter]] or subject bias is an issue, the control group is managed through [[double-blind]] testing.

==See also==
*[[Double blind]]
*[[Experiment]]
*[[Null hypothesis]]
*[[Placebo effect]]
*[[Randomized controlled trial]]
*[[Spontaneous remission]]

[[Category:Science]]
[[Category:Research terms]]
{{stub|science}}

Categories: Science, Research terms
Experimenter bias

{{sciencenav}}
{{Sources needed}}
'''Experimenter bias''' is the introduction of any [[bias]] into the conclusions of an experiment due to the preconceptions or goals of the experimenter being made clear to participants in the study. The bias can be introduced at any stage of the experiment, from the construction of the experiment, the selection of subjects, the administration of the experiment,  the analysis of the data, or the conclusions drawn. 

This issue arises often in [[Social science|social]] and [[biological]] sciences, but only very rarely has it been noted in the history of the [[physical science]]s.

==Prevention==
Experimenter bias stems from the deep-seated beliefs of an experimenter and is therefore difficult to prevent. Modern [[psychology]] generally supports the belief that it is not possible to prevent experimenters from being biased, so it is necessary to design experiments in ways that bias cannot influence the results.

A great number of experimental methodologies are attempts to limit the unintentional introduction of experimenter bias. These include [[randomized controlled trial]]s and [[double blind]]. Double-blind experiments are advisable whenever possible. In cases where measurements are recorded by human observers rather than by mechanical instruments, it is advisable to train people as observers who have little or no stake in the outcome of the experiment until their recorded observations correlate well on trials.

Minimizing interaction between the theorist(s) and experimental subjects to the barest minimum will limit the effects of bias, although this is not possible for all types of investigation.

==Involvement in woo==
Most experiments that purport to show evidence for [[psychic powers]], [[alternative medicine|alternative]] and [[quack medicine|quack]] medicine, or other [[woo]] fail to use proper methods and controls to limit experimenter bias. (For example, the doctor telling patients that [[homeopathy]] will work while failing to do so for the [[placebo]].) When [[Reproducibility|replication attempts]] are made that do control for experimenter bias, the results are shown to be no better than chance.

==See also==
*[[Cherry picking]]

==External links==
*{{wpa|Observer-expectancy effect}}

==References==
{{reflist}}

{{stub|science}}

[[Category:Cognitive biases]]

Categories: Cognitive biases
Expert witness

{{law}}
{{cquote|''I'm an expert witness. Why? Because I say I am.''|||[[Satan]], ''The Garden of Allah''; Don Henley}}

An '''expert witness''' is someone [[prostitute|paid]] to appear in court to attempt to blind them with brilliance, or at least baffle them with [[bullshit]], in the cause of the side that hired them.

==The argument from authority==
Sometimes, they do good work… sometimes, they don't. In general, an "expert" witness may be brought in ostensibly to present at least one [[argument from authority]]. This is independent of which side of the prosecution the expert witness is testifying. For example, in the murder trial of Sally Clarke, who was accused of killing both of her children, an expert witness was brought in to state that the odds against the children's deaths was 1 in 73 million.<ref>[http://www.badscience.net/2006/10/the-prosecutors-phallusy The Prosecutor’s Phallusy] by Ben Goldacre (October 28, 2006) ''Bad Science''.</ref> This seemed to imply that the odds of her being guilty of murder were 72,999,999 out of 73 million. For whatever reason, the jury issued a guilty verdict. It seemed beyond question that the [[probability]] argument weighed heavily in the minds of the jurors. The problem is, even experts are prone to [[cognitive biases]], and likely to emphasize incriminating evidence, while ignoring the exculpatory evidence. In the Sally Clarke case, the 1 in 73 million figure was ''irrelevant'' in the case, as [[improbable things happen| the two children were already dead]], therefore it is only certain that the ''[[post hoc]]'' probability was equal to one.

==Expertise==
Sometimes experts know what they are talking about. Many laypeople have trouble understanding technical subjects like DNA evidence or analysis of tire tracks or gas chromatography with flame analyzation detectors. Experts can be helpful.

==See also==
*[[Expert for hire]]

==References==
{{reflist}}

{{stub|law}}
Explore Evolution

{{crenav}}
'''''Explore Evolution''''' is a propaganda piece put out by the [[Discovery Institute]] in 2007. It is part of their attempt to push the concept of teaching the "strengths and weaknesses" of teaching [[evolution]] in public schools. Of course, all the weaknesses it pushes comes from other previous works by Discovery Institute fellows like [[Dr. Michael Behe|Michael Behe]] and [[Jonathan Wells]], both of whom merely recycle old [[creationist claims]] and declare them to be new arguments. None of the weaknesses in the book are actually weaknesses, and it mostly presents warmed over [[creationism]] - which has been [[Point refuted a thousand times|refuted countless times]]. 

==External links==
*[http://www.exploreevolution.com/ ''Explore Evolution'' Official Site]
*[http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2008/09/discovery-textbook-review/ A review] of ''Explore Evolution''.

{{crebox}}{{stub|creationism}}

[[Category:Discovery Institute]]
[[Category:Intelligent design creationism]]

Categories: Discovery Institute, Intelligent design creationism