1/15/2007
Irrational religious fundamentalist monkey wrestling over bones with different stories!
A poster who appears to be a Darwinist has visited this site (we call him/her Mr. Anonymous... God love 'em) is taking on all comers: (see comments on previous posts) . I admire the passion... even though IMHO it's somewhat misdirected.
Comments from my Blog: The Ideology of Evolution (Pretending to be Science)
To a poster: Irrational religious fundamentalist (love the names!) Mr. Anonymous wrote: "Do you have any actual arguments of substance, or are you just going to shout "is not!" over and over again and hope that somehow brings the last 150 years of research of professional biologists crashing down?"
Proof and demanding to be accepted as proof, IS NOT the same! "Proof" of evolution is in the (appearance of design but not designed) eye of the beholder… Evolution is accepted by some, (who wish to enforce this acceptance on all), and it serves as the nonbeliever's "garden" myth.
In the same post Mr. Anoymous wrote: "The problem with presenting the quote as you did is that ignores (from BBC interview with evolutionary biologist Richard) Dawkins's point, which is that appearance of design (from a glance) does not necessarily imply design. One of the results of biological science is a demonstration that things that "appear" designed could actually have easily come about without design.."
Who has the burden of proof here?
“Could actually have easily come about without design?????” (Are we sure we want to use the word EASILY so easily!) I would assert NOT!
Ok I’m dumb and ignorant BUT… I’m expected to believe something with a specific purpose and design (say... your digestive system or Darwin’s fave, the eye) can "easily come without design"(????!!!???) when the purpose is obvious to the most casual observer. (Ask the wino on the street what eyes are for). Does not true biology study JUST the opposite, how organs and systems ARE designed, how they work within the whole organism… and how to fix them when they malfunction? (i.e. heart surgery).
"World renowned" evolutionist Richard Dawkins admitted he "sorta had faith" (in that same BBC Interview) when discussing how things that "appear" designed could actually have come about without design." This somewhat odd assertion gives the appearance of a design (but not designed) to eliminate the concept of an intelligent purposeful creator… that some (like me) would assume... based on a structure that looks to be designed for a specific purpose (say a wing for flying), but IS NOT designed, just appears to be, but somehow works just like it was designed. (Whew!) . This has (to me and some others) the “appearance of illogic”!
This dogma of Darwinism (to me) has more the appearance of the stuff that comes out of the end of our digestive systems (that weren't designed... only appear to be) than anything resembling science!
“hope that somehow brings the last 150 years of research of professional biologists crashing down?”
Darwinism, not biology, would crash. (A little secret): evolution is not necessary to study any organism… we study how the organism works, its purposes and design. Then (some) draw conclusions that what we observe and study… IS NOT what we observed and studied! It would be easier to find oceanfront property in Tibet!
Folks. I’m exausted!
1/09/2007
The Ideology of Evolution (Pretending to be Science)
Of all my musings: “Intelligent Design” Creation in New Clothes?” seems to have generated all the heat! Thanx to all commenters (is that a word?... is now!) . Due to the volume of comments I am opening a new blog, that starts with my comment about the late Carl Sagan (who I contend now knows there is a God).
In the 1980 PBS series "Cosmos" with the late Mr. Sagan... he states (talking about origins) that one day in the organic chemical soup of early earth, "Quite by accident" life began... at the time I remember I sat up in my chair and blurted out loud: "He's making a philosophical statement, not a scientific one!"
Most prominent evolutionists, Richard Dawkins comes to mind (currently on a fierce anti-religion tirade), like Sagan, seem to want to wind the philosophy and the (so-called) science of evolution tightly together… thus forming the IDEOLOGY of evolution. This ideology of evolution is no doubt totally hostile to the idea of a creator and is often hostile to science itself, when any research challenges its' dogma (like the work of Michael J. Behe)! The ideology of evolution is INDEED the foundation of all modern atheistic ‘isms... and does not tolerate being questioned! For like other totalitarian ideologies… it tries to outlaw and persecute any alternatives offered. Otherwise, why do courts, lawyers and lawmakers need to be involved in “science” debates?
Any questioning of Darwin (aka: ID) is the new “Dred Scott” in the struggle… in 1857 (Dred Scott v. Sanford), Mr. Scott was declared mere property by the Supreme Court… much as questioning of evolution is declared “not-science”, by (just as misguided) judges today (just declare anything you don’t like “religion” and it’s banned! How convenient!). It took a horrific war to "correct" the grievous Dred Scott errors... and while this ID/Evolution "war" is not near as deadly (yet) as the War Between the States (1861-65), it’s just as passionate! Like the southern plantation owners of the past… most of the current “scientific” community has so much of their self-identity, reputations and resources invested in their ideology, they cannot entertain any challenges that would/could upset their world!
The truth is the ID/Evolution “debate” is much more about the ideology than the science.
1/01/2007
“Intelligent Design” Creation in New Clothes?
Evolution is the BIGGEST lie EVER perpetrated on the human race! Evolutionists say it’s scientific but where? Its central tenant: accidental life (how do you prove this?) leading to purposeful development (brain, eyes, ears, legs, etc.) is patently ABSURD!!! Evolutionists admit they cannot tell us absolutely "how or why" we got here, but damn sure are willing to tell us, with no uncertainty, how we didn't (NOT created by G-d). Do I detect an agenda here?
Modern day evolutionists are like a bunch on Communists refusing a debate on democracy because they contend democracy is "not a political system" (you see, they get to define the terms). Likewise evolutionists want to define the terms of “science” to fit their NARROW understanding, thus eliminating having to defend the weaknesses of their theory. BUNK!
The greatest outrages of the 20th century from Stalin and Hitler to Pol Pot used evolution as their foundation. Without G-d to restrain them, they set about to "perfect" the human race in THEIR own image, which inevitably meant dispensing with large numbers of the "imperfect" specimens. With no real evidence, evolutionists are terrified of open and honest debate. As a result any opposition MUST be ridiculed and silenced! As one scientist explained, "The fossil record gave us the leaves, evolutionary speculation drew the branches". This was done for ideological not scientific reasons.
P.S. Stephen Ray Gould, Carl Sagan and Isaac Asimov , etc. ALL now KNOW there is G-d!
