"Biology for Christian Schools is a high school textbook for Bible-believing Christians.  Those who do not believe that the bible is the inspired Word of God will find many points in this book puzzling.  This book was not written for them.

"Between true science (those things that can be accurately observed and measured) and the Bible, there are no contradictions.  After all, the One Who wrote the Bible also created the things that scientists can observe.  Men, however, can make mistakes in their observations, or they may reach a faulty conclusion from what they observe.  The people who have prepared this book have tried consistently to put the Word of God first and science second.  To the best of the author's knowledge, the conclusions drawn from observable facts that are presented in this book agree with the Scriptures.  If a mistake has been made (which is probable since this book was prepared by humans) and at any point God's Word is not put first, the author apologizes."

Good to know they've, um, evolved in their views since then.  

At the time, Sperling was discussing the form and mission of a new bipartisan congressional working
group the president wants to charge with establishing a deficit-reduction plan. In the president's view, it would consist of 16 members, plus the vice president as chairman, and finish up by the end of June.

House Democratic leaders didn't like the size of it, the reporting date, which falls very close to the deadline for raising the debt ceiling, or the perception that a White House plan had been baked without input from the president's allies on Capitol Hill. link

Now comes the hard part: matching deeds to words. And on that front, the president still has a lot of work to do. After the horrifying backtracks on civil liberties and the coddling of Wall Street, progressives will have to be forgiven if they aren't in a trusting mood. The nature of the opposition and what seems to be a reelection campaign focused on appealing to Independent voters who see compromise as an end in itself raise fears that the president will adopt the framework of his conservative deficit commissioners. The fact that his first meeting after the big speech was a photo op with co-chairs of that commission, Alan Simpson and Erskine Bowles, is not reassuring, particularly since the so-called Gang of Six, an informal bi-partisan group of senators, have been working for the past few months on what appears to be a proposal based explicitly on the Simpson-Bowles plan.

Progressives are supposed to take heart in the fact that there is one telling distinction between the president's plan and the Gang of Six's reported thinking: The latter puts Social Security on the table. (Even Paul Ryan leaves that untouched.) And yet, the president's budget director, Jacob Lew, was quoted this morning saying that Obama doesn't rule out raising the retirement age to 70 and that the administration believes "it's important that we deal with Social Security and we deal with it now."
...
The Simpson Bowles/Gang of Six proposal is the sweet spot for a deal. And that's a prospect that will leave a very sour taste in the mouths of many progressives. link