Well it’s been a rather busy week or so for science and religion discussions in the Bloggernacle. Some of the discussions were the old faithfuls of evolution and its variants. One new one that I’m almost loath to give publicity to is 9/11 Conspiracy Theories. Probably not far off from that land of what many consider to be problematic science is the ever popular criticisms of Meridian’s John Pratt. He’s had lots of “interesting” science articles for that online e-zine over the years. First up is LDS Science Review reviewing the “science” behind Pratt’s latest article. The article starts of purportedly about scientific method and then makes the questionable leap into attacking materialism as behind immorality, abortion and other such things. Hey, I thought Mormons were materialists? (Or at least it is a major strain of LDS thought)

Also this week Pat Robertson makes the odd assertion that voting out school board members trying to get intelligent design taught in school is the equivalent of “vot[ing] God out of your city. And if that’s the case, don’t ask for His help because he might not be there.” LDS Science Review discusses Robertson who to me seems to epitomize the mote/beam parable rather well. Since we’re discussing LDS Science Review I should also link to his post on the Black Sea and Noah’s Ark.

Over at The Spinozist Mormon there was an interesting discussion of a short paper by Harvard entomologist E. O. Wilson that was in New Scientist. The author presents three views of the human condition and, not surprisingly, thinks his is best. The discussion ends up being directly about religion and scientism and whether secular humanism ever ends up being a de facto religion.

By Common Consent joins into the fray of science discussions with a very interesting post that ranges over several science topic. One of the papers linked to is a Dialog paper that’s a great brief overview of philosophy of consciousness and some potential issues for Mormons. Sadly there wasn’t nearly as much discussion as I’d have hoped for. So perhaps we can give it a second lease on life here.

Next up Mormanity has an article about the new FARMS review where an other scientist takes on Southerton’s claims about DNA and the book of Mormon. The figure this time is Ryan Parr, a biological anthropologist. He’s written many studies on DNA studies of Native Americans unrelated to religious questions. While the comments got a little heated they were well worth reading. Dan Peterson makes an appearance so those who enjoy his acidic wit will want to read. Those who don’t should probably at least read the FARMS article being debated.

The ever popular Book of Mormon horse question has raged around the Bloggernacle this week as well. Mormanity has a brief discussion of a Peterson/Roper review. Dave over at DMI has up a discussion of an other perhaps “embarrassing” Meridian science article. This one isn’t by John Pratt, but does sweep a lot of issues under the table. A lot of apologists I spoke to considered this a great example of “bad apologetics.” Chris over at MoBlo discusses both Dave’s post and the Meridian article as well.

Finally over at Mormons and Evolution are two posts about a Joseph F. Smith letter regarding teaching evolution at BYU early in the 20th century. (Part 1 and Part 2) It’s quite interesting to read. He is simultaneously trying to say it’s inappropriate to teach it at BYU while saying the church doesn’t take a position. It’s good to see that blog back from a long quiet, and as well engaging evidence that might not strongly support their own view.

For the non-Mormon blogging situation, I heartily recommend everyone head over to Cosmic Variance and read the guest post by noted science writer Lawrence Krauss’ discussion of both string theory and ID. This was in response to his controversial New York Times editorial that both Cosmic Variance (con) and Not Even Wrong (pro) discussed last week.

Vaguely LDS related is a discussion about changes in the brain during meditation. OK, not very LDS related at all, but still religiously related and very interesting.

There’s also an interesting discussion of ID as bad religion which manages to invoke the call of Cthuthu. Brandon at Siris has an excellent and more formal discussion of two rarely discussed problems with ID.

Two other things of note. Scientific American has its own blog and New Scientist has a podcast. (Although the podcast is easier to get through iTunes by just searching for New Scientist)