Free Republic
Browse · Search
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Evolution debate persists because it's not science
The Sun News ^ | February 23, 2009 | By Raymond H. Kocot

Posted on 02/22/2009 10:58:04 PM PST by GodGunsGuts


Monday, Feb. 23, 2009

Evolution debate persists because it's not science

By Raymond H. Kocot


But did you ever wonder why Darwinism's general theory of evolution, sometimes called macroevolution, has been debated for over 150 years without resolution? The surprising answer is Darwin's macroevolution theory is not a legitimate science. The National Academy of Sciences clearly defined science in its 1998 guidebook for science teachers. The definition begins with [stating that] science is a particular way of knowing about the world, and ends with, "Anything that can be observed or measured is amenable to scientific investigation. Explanations that cannot be based on empirical evidence are not part of science." In other words, a legitimate scientific theory (a hypothesis or idea) must be observable in real time and must be testable, yielding reproducible results. That is the core of the scientific method that has brought man out of the Dark Ages.

Because confirmable observations and generating experimental data are impossible for unique events like life's origin and macroevolution theory, world-famous evolutionary biologist Ernst Mayr prompts evolutionists to construct historical narratives to try to explain evolutionary events or processes. In other words, stories are all evolutionists can muster to support macroevolution theory. If macroevolution theory, which must rest on faith in a story and is considered to be scientific, why not the creation story. With that in mind, it is no wonder the molecules-to-man debate has persisted for 150 years...

(Excerpt) Read more at ...

TOPICS: Culture/Society; Editorial; News/Current Events; Philosophy
KEYWORDS: creation; evolution; goodgodimnutz; intelligentdesign; spam
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 181-200201-220221-240 ... 661 next last
To: Cedric

Hitler, and the majority of Germans during the time of Nazi Germany, were Christians.

When looking at the language Hitler used to whip up hatred of the Jews “blood upon the Cross” and “cast the vipers out of the Temple” took center stage.

As such the Nazi’s were drawing upon a long and storied tradition of prevalent anti-Jewish sentiment among European Christian communities.

201 posted on 02/23/2009 12:37:10 PM PST by allmendream ("Wealth is EARNED not distributed, so how could it be redistributed?")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 200 | View Replies]

To: allmendream
They haven't ‘held up’ anything other than public opinion.

How could such insignificant ignoramuses have any appreciable impact on public opinion? And such a small number of insignificant ignoramuses at that.

202 posted on 02/23/2009 12:38:14 PM PST by YHAOS
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 190 | View Replies]

To: Cedric

Which is not to say that Hitler or the Nazi’s were “good” Christians; but they thought of themselves as such, wore crosses, prayed, carried Bibles, put crosses on their equipment, wrote “God is with us” on their belt buckles, etc, etc.

All the trappings of Christianity, but none of the spirit of Christ.

Reminds me of several posters on this forum.

203 posted on 02/23/2009 12:40:46 PM PST by allmendream ("Wealth is EARNED not distributed, so how could it be redistributed?")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 200 | View Replies]

To: YHAOS; allmendream
And again, why do you pay any attention to people who have so little effect on the really important issues?
204 posted on 02/23/2009 12:42:33 PM PST by YHAOS
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 202 | View Replies]

To: Cedric; DoctorMichael

Cedric, once again I see that one of your cut’n’paste posts has been demolished by the actual facts. Thanks doc, for doing the dirty work this time.

Quote mining is a tired, annoying, dishonest creationist practice we are all very familiar with. You won’t get anywhere with it in life (except in the eyes of fellow dolts such as yourself.)

And your response to being shown how dishonest your post was was to snidely remark that he “missed one.” You are yet another embarrassment to conservatism.

205 posted on 02/23/2009 12:42:43 PM PST by whattajoke (.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 191 | View Replies]

To: Lyantana
If it can not be tested and observed and reproduced it is a THEORY. If it is a THEORY it is NOT a FACT. It is only an Idea that someone invented. It becomes a SCIENTIFIC FACT once it has been Tested, Observed and Reproduced. It doesn't matter how much you BELIEVE in the THEORY, it is still ONLY a THEORY.

Oh dear. You shouted at the top of your lungs but all you did was draw attention to your hopelessly incorrect ideas of how science works. Do let me know if you'd like to know why your post is so incorrect.
206 posted on 02/23/2009 12:44:25 PM PST by whattajoke (.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 181 | View Replies]

To: Cedric

As predictable as the sun rising.....

207 posted on 02/23/2009 12:47:10 PM PST by metmom (Welfare was never meant to be a career choice.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 198 | View Replies]

To: allmendream
I just checked my New Testament, and the subtitle is not: “Preservation of Favoured Races in the Struggle for Life.”
208 posted on 02/23/2009 12:48:01 PM PST by Cedric
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 201 | View Replies]

To: whattajoke

Never laid a glove on me.

209 posted on 02/23/2009 12:50:36 PM PST by Cedric
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 205 | View Replies]

To: metmom
What is your obsession with perverse practices that you keep referring to them in your posts?

Sorry, but I think medical quackery is a bit over the top, even for FR.

If you have a problem with it I suggest you take it up with those who post bizarre medical advice.

Hint: it isn't anyone I hang out with.

The interesting fact is that the same people you hang out with seem to think HIV doesn't cause AIDS, that AIDS treatment is the cause of AIDS, and that your "perverse practices" are appropriate treatment for a wide range of diseases.

Personally, I think that all forms of science denial are new age mumbo jumbo. Some comes from the left wing, some from the right wing, but it's all the same rubbish.

210 posted on 02/23/2009 12:52:36 PM PST by js1138
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 192 | View Replies]

To: Cedric
Never laid a glove on me.

Oh I believe you. Because you, like so many creationists, have absolutely no ability to see the blatant lies and distortions even when clearly presented to you. It's a pathos, to be sure.
211 posted on 02/23/2009 12:52:36 PM PST by whattajoke (.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 209 | View Replies]

To: Cedric
Races refers to varieties within a population, not different human populations differentiated by skin color.

But nice attempt at misreading a word used in the 1860’s with an eye to the modern meaning.

Is your understanding of the subject really as shallow as THAT?

212 posted on 02/23/2009 12:53:37 PM PST by allmendream ("Wealth is EARNED not distributed, so how could it be redistributed?")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 208 | View Replies]

To: whattajoke

“Evolution [is] a theory universally accepted not because it can be proven by logically coherent evidence to be true, but because the only alternative, special creation, is clearly incredible.” (Professor D.M.S. Watson, leading biologist and science writer of his day.)
“My attempts to demonstrate evolution by an experiment carried on for more than 40 years have completely failed.....It is not even possible to make a caricature of an evolution out of paleobiological facts...The idea of an evolution rests on pure belief.” (Dr. Nils Heribert-Nilsson, noted Swedish botanist and geneticist, of Lund University)
“Scientists who go about teaching that evolution is a fact of life are great con-men, and the story they are telling may be the greatest hoax ever! In explaining evolution we do not have one iota of fact.” (Dr. Newton Tahmisian, Atomic Energy Commission.)
“When you realize that the laws of nature must be incredibly finely tuned to produce the universe we see, that conspires to plant the idea that the universe did not just happen, but that there must be a purpose behind it.”
(John Polkinghorne, Cambridge University physicist, “Science Finds God,” Newsweek, 20 July, 1998)
“Many have a feeling that somehow intelligence must have been involved in the laws of the universe.”
(Charles Townes, 1964 Nobel Prize winner in physics, “Science Finds God,” Newsweek, 20 July, 1998)
“250,000 species of plants and animals recorded and deposited in museums throughout the world did not support the gradual unfolding hoped for by Darwin.” (Dr. David Raup, curator of geology at the Field Museum of Natural History in Chicago, “Conflicts Between Darwinism and Paleontology”)
“The miracles required to make evolution feasible are far greater in number and far harder to believe than the miracle of creation.” (Dr. Richard Bliss, former professor of biology and science education as Christian Heritage College, “It Takes A Miracle For Evolution.”)
“Scientists at the forefront of inquiry have put the knife to classical Darwinism. They have not gone public with this news, but have kept it in their technical papers and inner counsels.” (Dr. William