Posted on 08/28/2002 9:36:04 AM PDT by gdani
Making Monkeys Out of Evolutionists
Wednesday, August 28, 2002
By Cal Thomas
Tribune Media Services
It's back-to-school time. That means school supplies, clothes, packing lunches and the annual battle over what can be taught.
The Cobb County, Ga., School Board voted unanimously Aug. 22 to consider a pluralistic approach to the origin of the human race, rather than the mandated theory of evolution. The board will review a proposal which says the district "believes that discussion of disputed views of academic subjects is a necessary element of providing a balanced education, including the study of the origin of the species."
Immediately, pro-evolution forces jumped from their trees and started behaving as if someone had stolen their bananas. Apparently, academic freedom is for other subjects. Godzilla forbid! (This is the closest one may get to mentioning "God" in such a discussion, lest the ACLU intervene, which it has threatened to do in Cobb County, should the school board commit academic freedom. God may be mentioned if His Name modifies "damn." The First Amendment's free speech clause protects such an utterance, we are told by the ACLU. The same First Amendment, according to their twisted logic, allegedly prohibits speaking well of God.)
What do evolutionists fear? If scientific evidence for creation is academically unsound and outrageously untrue, why not present the evidence and allow students to decide which view makes more sense? At the very least, presenting both sides would allow them to better understand the two views. Pro-evolution forces say (and they are saying it again in Cobb County) that no "reputable scientist" believes in the creation model. That is demonstrably untrue. No less a pro-evolution source than Science Digest noted in 1979 that, "scientists who utterly reject Evolution may be one of our fastest-growing controversial minorities . . . Many of the scientists supporting this position hold impressive credentials in science." (Larry Hatfield, "Educators Against Darwin.")
In the last 30 years, there's been a wave of books by scientists who do not hold to a Christian-apologetic view on the origins of humanity but who have examined the underpinnings of evolutionary theory and found them to be increasingly suspect. Those who claim no "reputable scientist" holds to a creation model of the universe must want to strip credentials from such giants as Johann Kepler (1571-1630), the founder of physical astronomy. Kepler wrote, "Since we astronomers are priests of the highest God in regard to the book of nature, it befits us to be thoughtful, not of the glory of our minds, but rather, above all else, of the glory of God."
Werner Von Braun (1912-1977), the father of space science, wrote: " . . . the vast mysteries of the universe should only confirm our belief in the certainty of its Creator. I find it as difficult to understand a scientist who does not acknowledge the presence of a superior rationality behind the existence of the universe as it is to comprehend a theologian who would deny the advances of science."
Who would argue that these and many other scientists were ignorant about science because they believed in God? Contemporary evolutionists who do so are practicing intellectual slander. Anything involving God, or His works, they believe, is to be censored because humankind must only study ideas it comes up with apart from any other influence. Such thinking led to the Holocaust, communism and a host of other evils conjured up by the deceitful and wicked mind of uncontrolled Man.
There are only two models for the origin of humans: evolution and creation. If creation occurred, it did so just once and there will be no "second acts." If evolution occurs, it does so too slowly to be observed. Both theories are accepted on faith by those who believe in them. Neither theory can be tested scientifically because neither model can be observed or repeated.
Why are believers in one model -- evolution -- seeking to impose their faith on those who hold that there is scientific evidence which supports the other model? It's because they fear they will lose their influence and academic power base after a free and open debate. They are like political dictators who oppose democracy, fearing it will rob them of power.
The parallel views should be taught in Cobb County, Ga., and everywhere else, and let the most persuasive evidence win.
Cal Thomas is making no claim to be presenting evidence for evolution. He is making the point that the evolutionist lobby is engaging in misleading propaganda when they claim that real scientists all believe in evolution.
If Cal Thomas did assert that creationist point of view was correct because "Famous and intelligent" people believed it, your analogy still would be wrong. It would be like arguing that the Denver Broncos suck as a football team because thousands of famous and intelligent local fans think so. Forget the goofy BMW thing.
Still thousands of famous and intelligent fans can be wrong. All Cal Thomas is arguing for is letting the detractors of evolution have the freedom to express the evidence for their position.
You could benefit by a course in logic. This is also the point where evolutionary theory breaks down as noted by law professor Philip Johnson in "Darwin on Trial" etc.
Or, if He gave you free will, he would give you the opportunity to open the door when He knocked.
All I can say is that, based on personal experience, He does knock.
Name an eye witness to creation.
My Old Testament history class at Oklahoma Baptist University taught me that the two different creation stories (yes, there are two, ready Genesis chaps 1 and 2) were given to Man by divine inspiration.
Since when can people have a clear understanding of what God is saying to them? If that were so, then why aren't all Christians in the same denomination? Are we saved by grace, or is it works?
Humans can never completly understand God. So I conclude that the two different creation stories in the Bible cannot possibly precise "fact". They are imperfect interpretations by humans of what God told them.
Like a pre-human perhaps?
According to the Bible, God made man out of the dust of the earth.
By the way, the "monkey" thing is a derrogatory item thrown about by people who don't understand Evolution. Both "monkeys" and man evolved from a common species that died out millions of years ago. Man DID NOT evolve from monkeys.
And what evidence do you have for such a statement? Are there any written documentation that says so? Darwin's only been dead for over a century or so.
Please don’t dig the hole you have made any deeper. You will stay after school and write on the blackboard “The Law of Gravity” 100 times.
In other words, you admit that you are unqualified to determine the factual accuracy of the content, but it sure sounded scientific to you.
I run into the same response when a vendor comes to management with a gee-whiz PowerPoint presentation about the latest buzzword in the IT industry. Management thinks that the vendor has somehow "proven" their technology; us worker-bees then have to go in and correct their impression, using language that can be understood by idiots and education majors.
And what are you concious of? Does your consciousness entertain the thought that there is more to creation than meets the eye?
bttt....this is worth repeating.
Because he has more scientific knowledge than do, or can ever hope to. If he 'created' science, it stands to reason he is much further advanced than we are. 8 * )
Alas, that's not "proof" in any scientific sense, because it's not God, but merely the work of God. We can acknowledge it as being (somehow) the work of God only after we acknowledge that shout of "I AM" for what it really is.
I'm ok with this as long as it sticks to generalities, but when some makes the leap from "sense of wonder" to "Genesis is literal history", I can't follow that path. Religious texts are graven images, as surely as idols of gold.
Belief should be the servant of truth, not its master.
Read Dawkins.
By neither, but a personal relationship with Jesus Christ. Denominations are not 'Christian', some of the individuals within them are.
Trust me: He will.
Maybe he is even now. If my own experience is any guide, you'll know it by how hard you have to work to avoid answering the door.
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.