You have no evidence that this is true, which makes sense as such evidence is outside the realm of the observable.
the presuppositions of evolutionary scientists color everything they do
Everyone's presuppositions color everything they do, as your post illustrates. The important thing is to be able to identify and evaluate one's presuppositions.
Materialist presuppositions result in conclusions which are contradictory to the world. The Materialist cannot be consistent to the logic of their presuppositions, because the materialist lives in a reality which was made by something external to matter...God.
Once again, no evidence of this, it's outside the realm of the observable. You assume something does exist "out there," and you're taking it on faith that it is God as you think of him and not something or someone else.
Yet you call other people "brainwashed."
Wow.
I'm a Stanford graduate student right now. I majored in Math, Computer Science, and Physics as an undergrad. I would LOVE to watch you come to Stanford and conduct this little crusade of yours.
There's nothing mystical or contradictory in "materialism". In fact, it all fits together surprisingly well. In all the billions of ways our experiments could have gone wrong and actually contradict each other... none happen. Small discrepancies or "contradictions" are heavily sought after because that means the concepts/theories are premature and new science can be done to see what we missed.
Scientists change their theories to fit the facts.
Creationists change the facts to fit their theories.
Which is better?
4) Materialists build up walls of protection to shield themselves from the point of tension. The materialist then erects barriers, even if completely irrational or improbable, to try to deal w/ the contradiction of how he observes the world.
Deeply perceptive insights, Freedom protector! H. von Doderer and R. Musil, et al., have given a name to this sort of thing: second reality. They are re-constructions of the world of first reality -- into which each of us is born -- by a mind that rejects vital sectors of that reality -- e.g., human nature as a given, the universality of the human condition, the order and purposefuness of nature, the existence of God, objective morality, the sanctity of life and the human person, etc. -- driving them into "oblivion." The rejection of the order of first reality is for the purpose of allowing man to construct for himself a "reality" more according to his own wishes, goals, and desires. Second realities, therefore, are ideological, not realist, in form.
Still no man can evade the essential constitution of things, no matter how hard he may try to remain blind to them. Still people will try, and the results are readily visible to us in the form of various political, social, and scientific "movements."
One of the most famous second realities was the one constructed by Karl Marx. It is completely out of whack with human nature and the natural order, and so sooner or later has failed to deliver on its promises everywhere it has been tried.
I think at the root of a whole lot of present-day sociopolitical movements you will find a second reality: e.g., gay rights, global warming, the feminist movement, secular humanism, to name a few. Furthermore I think the populist version of neoDarwinism is premised on a second reality.
Anyhoot, FWIW. Thank you so much for your excellent essay/post, FreedomProtector!