Skip to comments.Evolution debate persists because it's not science
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 myrtlebeachonline.com ...
That’s an Evo-atheist lie! Hitler worshipped at Darwin’s Altar!
So why did Hitler order Darwin’s books burned?
Unfortunately for you and your ignoramus club, your word makes nothing so, and we are not stupid enough to place any creedence in your statements.
We have you well figured out.
Do you suppose he’s no kin to monkeys?
He didn’t order them burned! It’s a lie! Why do you feel the need to spread Satan’s lies on a conservative website! Have you no shame??
Where do you think “glare” comes from?
Coming from the biggest lying spammer on this board, GGG most likely will take that as a complement. I know that I would.
Whence do we get the right to believe, that from the very beginning Man was not what he is today? Looking at Nature tells us, that in the realm of plants and animals changes and developments happen. But nowhere inside a kind shows such a development as the breadth of the jump, as Man must supposedly have made, if he has developed from an ape-like state to what he is today.
I provided the documentation. Why did Hitler ban Darwin and Haeckel?
It’s hard for me to take a link miner with a user name like yours seriously.
So I’m not.
Wasn't that some forgery created by a Christian monk that was quickly recognized by scientists as not plausible and relegated to some dark closet?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.