It is correct that life didn’t just spring from nothing. The flaw in the Town Hall argument though, is that it’s reasoning is confused.
Evolutionary theory has never stated that life springs from nothing. The idea of “Spontaneous Generation” began with the ancient Greeks, and was later adapted by Christianity.
Jerry Newcombe’s not only unaware of the history of the subject he writes about, he’s also unaware of the fundamental tenet of science, which is empiricism. You can propose any idea you want, but unless you can back it up with data and facts, and then have that data replicated by other scientists in the field, it is absolutely meaningless. Just like in a court of law, hearsay evidence is not allowed.
Evolution is supported by radiometric dating and the science of stratigraphy. In order for evolution to be discredited, these scientific principles would have to be proven wrong. It only takes one instance, but so far that hasn’t happened.
Newcombe’s also overlooked the fact, that since God created everything in the universe, He also created the laws of physics, which include radiometric dating and stratigraphy. So to deny evolution is to deny the existence of God.
“So to deny evolution is to deny the existence of God.”
Presuming that what is observed is due to evolution. Otherwise, no.
It IS?
I thought that 4004 BC was disproved by those things.
Oh?
I thought you just typed:
You can propose any idea you want, but unless you can back it up with data and facts, and then have that data replicated by other scientists in the field, it is absolutely meaningless.
Nice tagline BTW
To say knolledge is meaningless if not empirical is like saying “This statement is meaningless”. Suppose it is true...then it would imply it itself is a meaningless statement, and thus not either true or false. Thus it is self contradictory. It is obviosly false.