Darwin, Lyell and Origin of Species (unscientific aspects of Darwin's ToE explored)

CMI ^ | November 5, 2009 | Dominic Statham

[GodGunsGuts]

The ideal of the coolly rational scientific observer, completely independent, free of all preconceived theories, prior philosophical, ethical and religious commitments, doing investigations and coming to dispassionate, unbiased conclusions that constitute truth, is nowadays regarded by serious philosophers of science (and, indeed, most scientists) as a simplistic myth...

[GodGunsGuts]

Ping!

[Buck W.]

“The ideal of the coolly rational scientific observer, completely independent, free of all preconceived theories, prior philosophical, ethical and religious commitments, doing investigations and coming to dispassionate, unbiased conclusions that constitute truth...”

Thanks God creation rationalizers who believe in the literal inerrancy of Genesis fit the description of the ideal!

[Moonman62]

Isn’t the automatic rejection of any evidence or theory indicating an Earth more than 10,000 years old real science?

[Buck W.]

Of course it is. After all, what good is science if it doesn’t perfectly support our pre-determined conclusions?

[RioSmith]

You creationists are the biggest bunch of morons on the face of the planet.

[Titus Quinctius Cincinnatus]

Evolution is the application of emotion to science.

[stormer]

Religion is the application of emotion to the unexplored.

[ElectricStrawberry]

Philosophers of science indeed....

OMG!!! Darwin lived in the science world of 150 years ago and an administrator thinks that means Man wore dinosaur skins and hunted T. rex.

[dirtboy]

YEC’ers calling anyone unscientific is the ultimate in pot/kettle/black.

[GodGunsGuts]

Your reply was most expected, seeing how you are an evo-athiest who pretends to be a Christian in order to make it appear that your attacks against genuine Christians are coming from within Christianity.

You have been asked if you accept Jesus Christ as your Lord and Savior many times, and not only have you refused to answer, you have likened this question to a rectal exam on numerous occasions.

As you are a liar and a deceiver there is no point in debating with you, as it might give lurkers the false impression that I think you are an honest person. There is only one approach to dealing with lying wolves in sheep's clothing (Matthew 7:15-20) like you, and that is to expose them for what they really are. You have been unmasked!

Take a bow, Bucky-boy:

[GodGunsGuts]

Would you care to back that up, or are you just flinging monkey poo?

[Buck W.]

Why do you humiliate yourself like this? I’m not complaining, just asking...

[Matchett-PI]

"Religion is the application of emotion to the unexplored."

Spend some time at the links below and you may be able to come up with some less ignorant comments and/or questions.

October 2009 Continuing to November 2009

<>

More

Even More

[Buck W.]

Why do YECs demonstrate such an icky measure of coprophilia?

[RoadGumby]

Science is a wonderful thing ! Look at all it has allowed mankind to do for himself. The Lord gave us a wonderful ability to think and reason. Monorail trains, fission reactors, light bulbs, radio, oh the list goes on. Science good.

But in regards to this Theory, science has done us no service, nor has it come close to proving a thing. If evolutionary Theory is true, given the enormous number of fossilized remains, WHERE are the transition animals?

Evolutionary theory says that life began in the ‘primordial ocean, in an organic soup” and that then, life began to diversify, become more complex. Eventually, life struggled itself out of the seas onto land. Where are the transitory animals showing that bridge?

Additionally, IF all life started in the seas, the seas being a relatively homogenous mix, all that initial life would probably be very similar. What made the differentiation between vegetation and animal life? If animals descended from early sea vegetation, where is my chlorophyl?

Silly perhaps, but still applicable.

Sadly, a man-made construct such as evolutionary theory, carries more weight with some Christians than the Word. A truly sad state of affairs when a Christian would deign to point at the Word of God and yell “You LIE!!!”

[ElectricStrawberry]

Here he listened to fiery free-thinkers who wanted to “liberate science” from religious influences. Lectures were given by radicals intent on reforming Church-dominated society and removing the Church’s influence.

Those BASTARDS!!! Who on earth would EVER think a church-dominated society is a bad thing??? Those radical SOBs...

[wbarmy]

Since the majority (if not all) all of the founding fathers were creationist (in that they believed God created the Earth), does that mean that they were all morons too?

Or just ignorant?

Or just willing to give credit to something greater than themselves?

[Buck W.]

“Sadly, a man-made construct such as evolutionary theory, carries more weight with some Christians than the Word. A truly sad state of affairs when a Christian would deign to point at the Word of God and yell “You LIE!!!””

Catholics recognize and acknowledge evolutionary theory. Are they yelling “You LIE!!!” at God?

[qam1]

“The ideal of the coolly rational scientific observer, completely independent, free of all preconceived theories, prior philosophical, ethical and religious commitments, doing investigations and coming to dispassionate, unbiased conclusions that constitute truth, is nowadays regarded by serious philosophers of science (and, indeed, most scientists) as a simplistic myth.”

There are, they are the oil and gas companies

Exxon Mobil doesn't care if the age of the Earth is 4 Billion or 6 thousand years old. All they care about is finding oil.

So who do they employ to find oil? Geologist who follow "Mainstream" Geology or "Creationism" Geologist?