I had some time the last few days to view the film "Expelled" by Ben Stein. If you've not seen it, he does a good job of unveiling the academic bias against scientific research that doesn't conclude that evolution is true. One short clip of an ACLU representative from Pennsylvania caught my attention. He says that Intelligent Design (ID) is simply another religious system. The expected conclusion from this remark is that if that is the case we must not allow it into scientific discussion.
My thought was this. What if it is religion, and it is true? There are some assumptions made in the derogatory statement by the ACLU guy. If it is religious, it is not scientific and if it is not scientific, it cannot be factual. But...what if someone would answer the accusation, "it is religion" with "Maybe it is", and pose the question, is it true? ID is continuallydisregarded not with scientific argument, but simply by calling it religion. That is supposed to end all credibility. In reality ID takes no more faith than evolution.
Evolution demands faith to believe that life began on the backs of crystals or was planted here by aliens. It requires faith to believe that information is added to DNA from unknown sources to create new life forms. It takes faith to believe that new species are formed through mutations even though this has not been observed and is not recorded in the fossil record. It's interesting in Biologybooks that I have looked at (it's been awhile) that in the first chapters they convince you that all the traits you have were inherited from genetic material within your parents' gene pool and the last chapters (on evolution) tell you that new species arose from ongoing processes of natural selection in which new genetic traits arose by chance and not from your parents. I want to launch into the detrimental nature of mutations, but I will withhold such rantings at this time.
Bottom line is this. Which theory is most consistent with what we observe, scientific law, the fossil record and logic ( as in, if there is a design there is a designer)? My challenge is this. If someone tries to discount ID, Creationism or any other non-evolutionary theory on the basis of religion, do not let them get away with it. Feel free to say maybe it is religion, but is it true? May someone please be held accountable for evidence on the evolutionary side of the argument!!!
In 1980 I remember sponsoring a debate at the local Jr. College over evolution. We had a professor from Texas-El Paso defending creationism (ID was not yet on the scene) and a professor from Illinois-Chicago defending evolution. The creationist talked about science while the main argument of the evolutionist was not scientific credibility for evolution, but rather why the creationist was simply religious and so was not credible. The creationist never used the Bible or faith as part of his argument and yet he was discredited because his basis was religion. Evolution is more philosophical than scientific! Usually science observes a process happening and then concludes the truth of it. Evolutionists on the other hand conclude evolution is true and decide to figure out exactly how it happened later. That's religious conviction!!
Thursday, February 25, 2010
Friday, February 12, 2010
Intellectual Smugness
There is a whole group of people in our educational system and filtered throughout our society that feel so superior intellectually that they at best just tolerate some of us common folk. As they force their intelligent conclusions on us they often try to illustrate their point by asking questions with their "sarcastic smugness". One such question I heard asked again recently that always seems to put even Christian educators on the defensive is, should we teach Genesis 1 in our classrooms as being literal and authoritative, or similar words that are meant to send the one being questioned squirming into a corner to hide or apologize.
But, let's look at the alternative. Evolutionists have no true answers to the origins of life. One of the very intellectual considerations is what has been penned as "Directed Panspermia". This theory proposed by Francis Crick and other "elite" scientists, considers the possibility that life on earth began from intelligent beings from other intelligent cultures in our universe, intentionally planting the beginnings of all of our life forms we have on earth, in seed form, so that they could all eventually evolve into what we see today. If you didn't catch that, here it is in common vernacular. Aliens came to earth and left the beginnings of life here so it could begin its evolutionary process.
This does not answer the ultimate question of the origin of life, but it does at least push it off to another galaxy somewhere. And, I'm sure if you were there, you would understand everything a lot better.
Here's the kicker. These people will try to embarrass you by asking if you think God created everything in 6 days as it says in Genesis. While their "scientific" understanding is that aliens started life on this planet in seed form. Like someone once said, it is amazing what people will believe if its not in the Bible.
If nothing else the account in the Bible is still consistent with what we observe. The Bible says that God created each kind of plant or animal with seed in them after their own kind. That is what genetic biology predicts. That each living thing produces after its own kind and it is what we observe taking place. We do not observe that there are millions of unusable developing organs or features being passed on from generation to generation in every form of life waiting for the completion of their evolutionary development when they are finally tied into the rest of the plant or animal's system they are residing in. (Such as the Nenonen gland that I mentioned in an earlier writing. You know the gland in the middle of the ribs that sprays good smelling scents under your arm when you lift it so we can do away with deodorants.) Where are these perpetual signs of evolution. I know, I know! It happens over so long of a period that no one can observe it. But we should see the ongoing development of new things waiting to happen in the next few million years.
So the next time someone tries to demean and discount your intelligence by asking if Genesis1 should be taught as fact, you need to ask if aliens planting life forms in the earth should be taught as fact, because that's about the best idea they got going. God creating is considered ridiculous, but now aliens getting things started, that's SCIENCE!
But, let's look at the alternative. Evolutionists have no true answers to the origins of life. One of the very intellectual considerations is what has been penned as "Directed Panspermia". This theory proposed by Francis Crick and other "elite" scientists, considers the possibility that life on earth began from intelligent beings from other intelligent cultures in our universe, intentionally planting the beginnings of all of our life forms we have on earth, in seed form, so that they could all eventually evolve into what we see today. If you didn't catch that, here it is in common vernacular. Aliens came to earth and left the beginnings of life here so it could begin its evolutionary process.
This does not answer the ultimate question of the origin of life, but it does at least push it off to another galaxy somewhere. And, I'm sure if you were there, you would understand everything a lot better.
Here's the kicker. These people will try to embarrass you by asking if you think God created everything in 6 days as it says in Genesis. While their "scientific" understanding is that aliens started life on this planet in seed form. Like someone once said, it is amazing what people will believe if its not in the Bible.
If nothing else the account in the Bible is still consistent with what we observe. The Bible says that God created each kind of plant or animal with seed in them after their own kind. That is what genetic biology predicts. That each living thing produces after its own kind and it is what we observe taking place. We do not observe that there are millions of unusable developing organs or features being passed on from generation to generation in every form of life waiting for the completion of their evolutionary development when they are finally tied into the rest of the plant or animal's system they are residing in. (Such as the Nenonen gland that I mentioned in an earlier writing. You know the gland in the middle of the ribs that sprays good smelling scents under your arm when you lift it so we can do away with deodorants.) Where are these perpetual signs of evolution. I know, I know! It happens over so long of a period that no one can observe it. But we should see the ongoing development of new things waiting to happen in the next few million years.
So the next time someone tries to demean and discount your intelligence by asking if Genesis1 should be taught as fact, you need to ask if aliens planting life forms in the earth should be taught as fact, because that's about the best idea they got going. God creating is considered ridiculous, but now aliens getting things started, that's SCIENCE!
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)
