To: Just mythoughts
seems as though the Nobel Prize is given to the adherents of the law of evolution But (as has been pointed out in these threads before) anyone who could present a scientific alternative to Darwin's basic model of evolution, which better explained all of the available data, made more accurate predictions, and was equally in accord with findings of all other sciences--that man or woman would scoop up a Nobel and a place in the history of science faster than you could say 'allele'
With respect, it is simply wrong to insist that science holds up Darwinism in the way that religions maintain dogmas. Anyone with better evidence meeting good empirical standards can knock Darwin off his perch: it hasn't happened yet. And really, refuting (as opposed to refining) the basic Darwinian model looks as likely as someone 'proving' that the earth is flat
44 posted on
09/19/2005 5:18:58 AM PDT by
SeaLion
("Belief in a cruel God makes a cruel man" -- Thomas Paine)
To: SeaLion
"But (as has been pointed out in these threads before) anyone who could present a scientific alternative to Darwin's basic model of evolution, which better explained all of the available data, made more accurate predictions, and was equally in accord with findings of all other sciences--that man or woman would scoop up a Nobel and a place in the history of science faster than you could say 'allele'"
You are not quite accurately describing "scientific alternative" because that word science has been perverted to mean only what evolutionists say it can mean.
"With respect, it is simply wrong to insist that science holds up Darwinism in the way that religions maintain dogmas. Anyone with better evidence meeting good empirical standards can knock Darwin off his perch: it hasn't happened yet. And really, refuting (as opposed to refining) the basic Darwinian model looks as likely as someone 'proving' that the earth is flat"
People do like to use that flat earth accusation as though it gives evolution credibility. At the base of Darwin was the rejection of the Heavenly Father, and he postulated an idea that gave himself his descendants a superior ranking compared and contrasted to human beings as a whole. Now while modern evolutionists bend over backwards to deny what old Darwin thought, the focus has been shifted away from his basic premise to now include allllll forms of life having one common descent, without absolutely zilch proof.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson