I find it interesting that he claims someone has made the theory of evolution the 'enemy of God'. Since Darwinism is the enemy of faith and the enemy of truth, it makes itself the inherent the enemy of God.
If and when 'evolution' is openly and plainly taught with the clear disclaimer that it is an unobservable theory, impossible to recreate in a laboratory, then it will be the enemy of nothing. But since they teach it as doctrine in public schools, colleges and the media, as though the theory is not controversial in the science community, it is ipso facto an enemy of God, as are all lies that pretend to be truth.
Hi The Crusader, I like you am a sceptic - as are all good scientists. I like you am also a person of faith, and shall defend that always. I have had my struggles with the Theory of Evolution, and have always maintained that it needs to be discussed as just that - a theory.
However, I ask you this question, as I ask myself: If evolution is a false theory, why are we all waiting on pins and needles to see if the "bird flu" is going to evolve to the point where humans can pass it freely to each other, without any birds being involved at all?
The theory of evolution is a theory, that is,
Theory: a well-substantiated explanation of some aspect of the natural world; an organized system of accepted knowledge that applies in a variety of circumstances to explain a specific set of phenomena; "theories can incorporate facts and laws and tested hypotheses"; "true in fact and theory"It is not unobservable theory, as there is no such thing. There are facts and observations (also known as data; see the primate skulls, below, for some excellent, and very photogenic, examples). There are also hypotheses and theories. Observations and facts lead to hypotheses which can be tested. With repeated testing, and confirmation at each test, you can end up with a well-supported theory. That is what the theory of evolution is, a well-supported theory. It has withstood 150 years of testing, including testing by fields of investigation which did not even exist 150 years ago.
"When a theory is supported by as much evidence as evolution, it is held with a very high degree of confidence" [from an NSF abstract, cited in RadioAstronomers's post #27 on another thread].
You, on the other hand, seem to be arguing from:
Belief: any cognitive content (perception) held as true; religious faith
Dogma: a religious doctrine that is proclaimed as true without proof
From your posts, it would seem that you are promoting a specific religious belief, and hoping to include it in science classes--where it clearly does not belong.
Finally, you write "[evolution] is ipso facto an enemy of God, as are all lies that pretend to be truth."
I am sure you will not agree with this, but I would put ID, not evolution, in this category. ID is creation science with the serial numbers filed off, hoping nobody will notice. Although a form of ID has been around for millennia, the current push for ID was developed in the late 1980s when CS was removed from schools by a Supreme Court decision. It is CS flying under the radar, attempting to pass as science. It is promulgated by political means, not by scientific means, and the recent court case in Dover exposed some of the lies behind ID. From all of this, what am I to think, other than that ID is inherently dishonest?
(At least CS is honest about what it believes.)
Now, the data I promised (enjoy--these are some beautiful specimens):
Figure 1.4.4. Fossil hominid skulls. Some of the figures have been modified for ease of comparison (only left-right mirroring or removal of a jawbone). (Images © 2000 Smithsonian Institution.)