Free Republic
Browse · Search
Smoky Backroom
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Making Monkeys Out of Evolutionists
Salt Lake City Tribune ^ | August 28, 2002 | Cal Thomas

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.


TOPICS: Heated Discussion
KEYWORDS:
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 181-200201-220221-240 ... 701-706 next last
To: LiteKeeper
There is only one other alternative - Special Creation by a Divine Creator

I'll also ask you - why just one creator? Why not two or ten thousand?

201 posted on 08/28/2002 12:49:21 PM PDT by gdani
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 198 | View Replies]

To: gdani
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.

Perhaps we should also present the evidence that the world is flat and let the students decide.

202 posted on 08/28/2002 12:49:48 PM PDT by cinFLA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: dubyagee
That's like saying the problem with the evolution theory is that everything that 'is' evolved. There are only two logical theories: evolution and creation. One requires everything to have evolved the other requires that everything is created.

According to evolution, fish evolved but pebbles did not. According to creation, both were created.

203 posted on 08/28/2002 12:50:54 PM PDT by Physicist
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 191 | View Replies]

To: LiteKeeper
Where do these life forms come from?

Typically they come from other life forms. If you are referring to the ultimate origin of life, that is not relevant to evolution. You also presented a false dichotomy of "evolution" or "God created the universe and all life within". Those are not the only two possibilities.
204 posted on 08/28/2002 12:52:59 PM PDT by Dimensio
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 198 | View Replies]

To: Saturnalia
I'm not embarassed or troubled by this...are you---your kind?

Running joke is 'evo-science'...

biggest cult of oxy-moonie-morons---art bells!

Latest evo gem--artist...

Sure. All domesticated animal husbandry is proof of evolution but in the case of planned animal husbandry, man, rather than environmental influences, play the role of selectivity. Try to think this through, which, I realize, may not be easy. If you cross a poodle to a poodle, do you get a wolf? (Knock, Knock)

Now: Do you care to give me scientific proof that God exists?

I'm not kidding. You people amaze me.

294 posted on 8/25/02 12:02 PM Pacific by AllSmiles

More...

Like FR 'patrickhenry'...

"search for the creator via evolution"---

"total--only evolution" too---

The papal encyclical rightwingprofessor-whack thinks/interprets---"professes evolution"...

could abortion be next???

Nebullis..."preschool evolution---INTENSIVELY"---

donh..."if the sun can create crystals-snowflakes...human life would certainly follow"---

also by donh...Hitler and nazi germany were all Christians---creationists!

dominick harr..."just like a ball bouncing down the stairs----evolution created everything"---

jennyp..."anarchist evolutionary(natural) capitalism---Christianity(manmade) is communism"---

and patrickhenry doesn't know..."if prior to darwin---if science existed"...

SkyRat...Divine hammer-retribution from above via evolution!

exdemmom...evolution is the "lug wrench" that fixes science--biology/life!

Running sores of evo schlock!

Few new ones by the vade--junior--ph evo cult...

More schlock---latests(evo proof/matches/links)...

over---abundance of dung for beetles...schlock providence/miracles

ground depressions on earth surfaces collect liquids producing ponding---more spontaneous schlock opportunities/diversity...

motion/movement is created via biological interference/resistance in gravitational force fields...

foot/toe ground contact---attractions/balance...

standing/walking/running upright

amazing...dancing too!

My own...how evo schlock made us...

Insects vibrate molecules and gas particles---sound...and how humans procreate via words/instruments---music/songs.

I get it!

This schlock is so simple...natural---unplanned---no design!

Presto...mommies/daddies---babies!

Only logic--sense--sanity could schock the evo-schlock world...if it could penetrate it!

One more evo gem by allsmiles...

CLASSIC...

I really don't care who is crazy as long as they are tame. But the religious are not tame. They insist upon imposing their lunatic beliefs upon the rational and the children of the rational. That's where you get yourselves in trouble. If you have any confidence in what you are saying at all, be content to keep it to yourselves, as atheists are.

381 posted on 8/26/02 5:42 AM Pacific by AllSmiles

Yeah...as atheists are?

All quotes accurate---some paraphased!

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

205 posted on 08/28/2002 12:53:12 PM PDT by f.Christian
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 183 | View Replies]

To: Dimensio
What are the alternatives then? Spontaneous generation, or special creation. Name another.

Typically they come from other life forms. If you are referring to the ultimate origin of life, that is not relevant to evolution.

Sure it is. Life forms had to come from somewhere. If the ultimate origin of life is unexplainable, then evolution is resting uncomfortably on shifting sand. Simple question: what is the original life form? Where did it come from?

206 posted on 08/28/2002 12:56:16 PM PDT by LiteKeeper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 204 | View Replies]

To: VadeRetro
ID is the science that says, "If it isn't a miracle, then that's a miracle!"
Hehehe. I'm gonna steal that one...
207 posted on 08/28/2002 12:57:24 PM PDT by jennyp
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 165 | View Replies]

To: gdani
Ah - now you are begging the question: the existence of even one creator negates evolutionary theory. I will discuss multiple creators, or not, after we establish that abiogenesis is impossible.
208 posted on 08/28/2002 12:58:19 PM PDT by LiteKeeper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 201 | View Replies]

To: LiteKeeper
Ah - now you are begging the question: the existence of even one creator negates evolutionary theory

No, it doesn't. As already pointed out to you, evolution makes no claims regarding the ultimate origin of the universe, etc. I don't know why that's so hard to understand.

209 posted on 08/28/2002 1:00:28 PM PDT by gdani
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 208 | View Replies]

To: LiteKeeper
Life forms had to come from somewhere. If the ultimate origin of life is unexplainable, then evolution is resting uncomfortably on shifting sand.

Wrong. Evolution deals with existing life, not with life emerging from where there was no life before. How that life came into being is not relevant to evolution. It is outside the scope of evolution. The first life forms could have been created through some chemical reaction in a pond somewhere, they could have been seeded on the planet by aliens or they could have been zap-poofed into existence by some divine entity and it would have no bearing on the validity of evolution.

Is gravitational theory unsound because it does not explain where matter originally came from?
210 posted on 08/28/2002 1:02:48 PM PDT by Dimensio
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 206 | View Replies]

To: Doctor Stochastic
I am well aware of the position that says evolutionary theory has to do with the change in living organisms. I am also well aware of the fact that evolutionists refuse to discuss origins. But the assumption in evolutionary theory is that the original life form "just happened" - some times referred to as abiogenesis. Pasteur proved, and others have confirmed that abiogenesis is impossible. So, if we can establish that it didn't "just happen" then we need to posit where it did come from. And if the answer is a Creator, then that puts evolution on shaky ground.
211 posted on 08/28/2002 1:02:58 PM PDT by LiteKeeper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 199 | View Replies]

To: Doctor Stochastic
I'm gonna give you the win on that one because I could not find the algebraic definition in my search. But I did find the scientific definition and the words 'capable to carry' would relate it to the informal usage, (as in a streetcar conductor 'carries' passengers to their destinations.). 8 * )

conductor (electrical)
A material that is capable to carry an electrical current. See also electronic conductor and ionic conductor

212 posted on 08/28/2002 1:02:59 PM PDT by dubyagee
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 193 | View Replies]

To: Physicist
According to evolution, fish evolved but pebbles did not.

Does that mean the pebbles have always existed?

213 posted on 08/28/2002 1:04:05 PM PDT by dubyagee
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 203 | View Replies]

To: LiteKeeper
And how does abiogenesis disprove evolution?

Evolution is not dependent on abiogenesis but on the existence of imperfect self-replicators.

214 posted on 08/28/2002 1:06:16 PM PDT by BMCDA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 208 | View Replies]

To: gdani
No, it doesn't. As already pointed out to you, evolution makes no claims regarding the ultimate origin of the universe, etc. I don't know why that's so hard to understand.

Simple. Many 'refutations' of evolution are hinged upon that strawman assumption. If that assumption is false then many 'refutations' of evolution are also false. Since they cannot possibly accept that any creationist argument might be lacking in logic, evolution must really say what they claim it says, not what anyone who has studied the theory says.
215 posted on 08/28/2002 1:06:23 PM PDT by Dimensio
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 209 | View Replies]

To: TxBec
ping
216 posted on 08/28/2002 1:06:55 PM PDT by Vic3O3
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: LiteKeeper
But the assumption in evolutionary theory is that the original life form "just happened"

Evolutionary theory contains no attempt at explaining the ultimate origins of life. You are either misinformed or you are lying. Abiogenesis is not a part of evolution, it is a completely seperate matter.
217 posted on 08/28/2002 1:07:56 PM PDT by Dimensio
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 211 | View Replies]

To: gdani
Arguments from silence are no arguments. And, evolutionists do make all kinds of claims about the origin of life. But the fact remains, abiogensis ( life from non-life) has been demonstrated as impossible. So, biogenesis (life from life) is the only alternative. And the question of the day is, where did the life come from that gave rise to the "protocell" of first life. If the answer is a Creator, evolution is on unstable ground. If the answer is not a Creator (regardless of what or whom that Creator might be), you now have to explain a lot of things. It does no good to tell us that life today came from life yesterday, by way of chance mutations, if you can't explain where the original life came from.
218 posted on 08/28/2002 1:09:09 PM PDT by LiteKeeper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 209 | View Replies]

To: Dimensio
Good News For The Day

‘The truth will set you free.’ (John 8:32)

"God's dismissal in the 19th century, and the humiliation of truth in the 2oth, was supposed to set the world free."

"The experiment has been under way for some time now, and it is fair to ask, what are the... results---so far?"

"The Nazi experience in Germany provides a case study. There, a government and a society were organized on the principle of God's non-existence. Did liberation come to pass? On the wall of one of the death camps there is a plaque. It preserves the language of one of Hitler's speeches. The plaque overlooks large mounds of human hair, piles of personal effects; shoes, spectacles. The plaque reads: "I freed Germany from the degrading fallacy of conscience and morality. We will train people capable of violence-imperious, relentless, cruel. . ."

"Those sentiments were nurtured on the same continent that gave the world the reformation. Which was more liberating? If someone came today and said: "I am the truth," we would not take him seriously. But when Jesus says it, we are tempted to let him get away with it. If he is mad, it is a beautiful madness; such an attractive insanity. Let us not be ashamed to offer Christ to the world."

‘The truth will set you free.’ (John 8:32)

----------------------------------------------------------------

Good News For The Day

‘I am the truth. . ..’(John 14:6)

For most of time, men and women have assumed that the truth was there to be found out. This began to change in the 19th century and the change gathered pace in the 20th. As people began to question the existence of God, it became obvious to some, that the existence of truth requires the existence of God. With God dismissed, it became impossible to conceive of truth in any absolute sense. This has resulted in the humiliation of truth. Truth is now whatever you would like it to be.

Truth's demise has filtered down through the great centers of learning, the arts, and on into streets and homes. Everything is possible with truth gone. Everything is permissible. Musicians make music that doesn't sound musical. Painters paint pictures that are incomprehensible to normal folk. Playwrights write plays that are nonsense, and architects design buildings that no one can understand. All this is put forward as legitimate, but what does it all mean?

No matter how much... popular culture---is encouraged to believe in the relativity of truth, no one can build a decent life on such a notion.

Inevitably proponents of freedom from God, and from absolute truth, are obliged to reach outside of their own system, and borrow something from theism in order to make their lives work. The person who believes that everything is valid, will soon find that he is condemned to meaninglessness. Christ is a standing offer of escape from such a hell as this To believe that truth is like Christ, is salvation indeed.

219 posted on 08/28/2002 1:11:38 PM PDT by f.Christian
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 217 | View Replies]

To: Dimensio
Evolutionary theory contains no attempt at explaining the ultimate origins of life. You are either misinformed or you are lying. Abiogenesis is not a part of evolution, it is a completely seperate matter.

Evolution has dozens of theories on the ultimate origin of life. If it doesn't even explain that what good is it?

220 posted on 08/28/2002 1:12:36 PM PDT by far sider
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 217 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 181-200201-220221-240 ... 701-706 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Smoky Backroom
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson