The Religion of Science (Evolution as Faith!)

CHJ ^ | Jan 14, 2006 | Nathan Tabor

[WatchYourself]

How can someone observe, study or experiment on evolution? Evolution is the process of something moving from one stage of development to another. What do we really have to scientifically prove evolution?

A scientist might have a fossil, but we can only speculate as to the age and appearance of the animal creating that fossil. No one has ever witnessed evolution of life, no one here now was there to observe, study and experiment. Like it or not, we can only form theories and beliefs about what might have been. As sound as these theories might be, they are and will always be theories. Evolution is simply a system of belief based on what we think might have happened. Those who believe in evolution have faith in the scientist’s abilities to speculate and imagine what might have been. This is not science. This is faith.

It is time we removed the phony and inaccurate label of ‘science’ from evolution and see it for what it really is - a religion, based on faith and a system of belief. If public schools are not allowed to teach religion, then the theories of evolution have no place in a public school classroom. If they are allowed to teach theories based on faith, like evolution, then creationism should be taught also.

[CarolinaGuitarman]

" Suggest? May? Doesn't seem to be direct observation to me. Those words imply speculation."

Name ONE theory in science that is proven, 100%. All theories are presented in tentative language. You are letting your religious zealotry blind you to the evidence.

You have ducked most of the posts I have given you so far, I am not surprised you waved away this one as well.

[From many - one.]

Pelicans etc are birds that "fly above the earth" See your own quote of Gen 1:20.

Your distinction is incorrect.

[Starve The Beast]

But if you drag the idea of an intelligent creator into lessons about evolution, all you're doing is forcing everybody else's kids to conform to your world view. What's fair about that?

[Coyoteman]

How come there's still apes and humans together if we evolved from them?

Gotcha, right? Admit it, you're stumped! Nyaaaa, nyaaaaaa, nyaaaaaaaaaaa!

Actually I was not stumped, I was watching football!

Evolution usually comes when there is pressure. When the climate changes occurred in Africa some 6 million years ago, the forests started to shrink while the grasslands expanded. Primates living in these areas at the time diverged; one group went each direction.

The group that remained in the familiar terrain of the forests evolved little.

The group that went (probably was forced) into the grasslands had to evolve, and quickly, in response to new conditions.

That's the quick (half time) answer off the top from my grad school days. For more details, and probably a lot more recent details, see: PatrickHenry's List-O-Links. That is always a good starting place for this type of question.

See you all after the game.

[connectthedots]

My faith in Jesus Christ is based on the historical evidence confirmed by eyewitnesses, secular history, archeology, and the internal and external consistency found in the Bible which was written over a very long period of time by numerous authors with no inconsistencies contain therein.

Sure, there is an element of faith involved, but not nearly as much as required to believe in evolution.

I don't think gravity can practically be considered a theory. I would say it is a fact. it is well understood and anyone can observe the effects of gravity in action. Can't say that about evolution, can you? Absent unusual circumstances, it you release a rock from the top of a building, it is going to fall towards the ground every time. No ration person would claim that involves speculation.

[wintertime]

But if you drag the idea of an intelligent creator into lessons about evolution, all you're doing is forcing everybody else's kids to conform to your world view. What's fair about that? ( Starve the Beast)

To Starve the Beast,

It isn't fair to FORCE intelligent design on resistant parents and children because it has religious consequences.

It isn't fair to FORCE Darwin's Theory of Evolution on resistant parents and children because it has religious consequences.

In fact there are HUNDREDS of policy and curriculum issues that government schools must decide that WILL establish the religious worldview of some and trash and undermine those of others.

Solution: Begin the process of privatizing universal K-12 education. Parents, teachers, principals and universities are in the best position to privately negotiate these matters

[lemura]

The current issue of Scientific American has an article discussing the potential for mapping personal genomes. One wonders whether those who demonstrate a marked lack of ability to reason would avail themselves to gene therapies that might correct this condition. Would you be willing to take such a test in order to discover that you may possess genetic tendencies that engender spiritual belief?

[connectthedots]

Would you be willing to take such a test in order to discover that you may possess genetic tendencies that engender spiritual belief?

I don't believe in science fiction or waste effort on wildly speculative scenarios.

[shuckmaster]

How come there's still apes and humans together if we evolved from them?

Is an ancient George Carlin quote the best argument you have? How come there's still parents if we evolved from them? duh!

[Just mythoughts]

There is a little TOE idol to guard and protect and not a job that can be done alone, toooooo much at stake, careers and all.

[Dimensio]

It isn't fair to FORCE non-Shaira Law on Muslim parents and children because it has religious consequences.

[Dimensio]

I don't think gravity can practically be considered a theory. I would say it is a fact.

So explain gravity. State what it is, how it works, what causes it and demonstrate that it is more than "theory".

[loboinok]

"Pelicans etc are birds that "fly above the earth" See your own quote of Gen 1:20."

The earth includes water AND land. All birds that fly, fly above the earth, whether above the land or above the water.

However, "Genesis 1:20 - And God said, Let the WATERS bring forth... and fowl that may fly above the earth..." is refering to fowl that live from the water (it is their domain).

"Genesis 2:19 - And out of the GROUND the LORD God formed every beast of the field, and every fowl of the air..." is refering to fowl that live from the land.

We do not see Pelicans and Puffins in Oklahoma because they are birds of water.

The 2nd chapter of Genesis is added detail to the "Creation Account" using the "Law of Recurrence" I alluded to in an earlier post.

[Dimensio]

So where did chickens come from? They don't fly, and they're certainly not water-dwelling.

[ChessExpert]

You obviously chose to ignore the rest of the chapter where Darwin said the fossil record was not a problem. Typical.
336 posted on 01/14/2006 4:20:09 PM PST by CarolinaGuitarman
"You obviously chose to ignore the rest of the chapter where Darwin said the fossil record was not a problem. Typical."

I’ve been accused of not reading the chapter, not understanding the chapter, and now, misrepresenting the chapter. All accusations are made with absolute certainty, no evidence, and are all wrong.

The quote was from the last (concluding) paragraph! I think it captures the entire chapter fairly well. And so does the title of the chapter: “On the Imperfection of the Geological Record.” Or, “since the facts don’t support the theory, malign the facts.” This has since been augmented by neo-Darwinists to include “malign the critics.”

[ChessExpert]

"More likely, he's only read that one paragraph from creationist websites, rather than from the book itself."

Perhaps some will find this a reasonable guess. But it’s wrong, please see post 286, where I mention my source.

[loboinok]

"So where did chickens come from? They don't fly, and they're certainly not water-dwelling"

I have several chickens roosting 30 to 40 feet up in the trees, right now. Have you ever witnessed a chicken climbing a tree? LOL

Maybe you have been eating too many Tyson birds. ;)

[ChessExpert]

"It's very rare that a creationist has spent the time to read the entire book to catch the full weight of Darwin's theory. It's actually very easy reading; without the usual jargon that weighs down most other scientific works."

I’m not a creationist (yet), but I have read the book. It’s O.K., certainly nothing to fawned over.

CarolinaGuitarman, are you from Asheville?

[ChessExpert]

"Be fair. ChessExpert claims to have understood the opening sentence of the chapter. But then Chuck started to use longer sentences, bigger words, and aubordinate clauses, and it got all too complicated."


Somehow, I don't think you are trying to be fair. Snide maybe?

To be correct, the text cited was from the concluding paragraph of the chapter, not the first. I understood the entire paragraph, but found it unpersuasive. Read it carefully, without prejudice, and you might find it unpersuasive also.

And shouldn't’t your name be “Monkey Boy”? :)

[Baraonda]

"...evolution and see it for what it really is - a religion, based on faith and a system of belief."

a pseudo cult intent on the debasing, perversion, ridicule, belittling, deameaning and ultimate destruction of Christianity and its Western Culture and peoples.

Evolution is a cult of the devil's propagation.