God never stepped aside. He is continuously guiding the process of evolution. What seem to us to be random mutations and changes in the environment are not radom from God's perspective.
What you seemed to choose to overlook is the fact there are many scientists and even evolutionists that not only disagree with you but disagree each other as well. This being the case, how do you choose which evolutionists to believe? Majority rules?
No. The scientific method rules. Those hypotheses that stand up to repeated empirical testing are those that get accepted.
And, BTW, the assertions in the book you quote are simply wrong.
Ok. At what point did God step aside to let evolution take over?
"God never stepped aside. He is continuously guiding the process of evolution. What seem to us to be random mutations and changes in the environment are not radom from God's perspective."
Is that example of the scientific method? Many evolutionist would dismiss your statement because it clearly isnn't!
"And, BTW, the assertions in the book you quote are simply wrong."
Now see that what scares me, that my kids might one day have a science teacher as close minded as yourself and who will blindly dismiss other scientists even other evolutionists because they don't fit your indoctrinated interpretation of the data!!
„Ï Evolutionists often insist that evolution is a proved fact of science, providing the very framework of scientific interpretation, especially in the biological sciences. This, of course, is nothing but wishful thinking. Evolution is not even a scientific hypothesis, since there is no conceivable way in which it can be tested. EVOLUTION IS RELIGION, NOT SCIENCE
- IMPACT No. 107 May 1982
by Henry M. Morris, Ph.D.228
A prominent British biologist, a Fellow of the Royal Society, in the Introduction to the 1971 edition of Darwin's Origin of Species, said that "belief in the theory of evolution" was "exactly parallel to belief in special creation", with evolution merely "a satisfactory faith on which to base our interpretation of nature". 2 G.W. Harper calls it a "metaphysical belief". 3G.W. Harper, "Alternatives to Evolutiotism", School Scince Review (V. 51 Sep. 1979), p 16.
two leading evolutionary biologists have described modern neo-Darwinism as "part of an evolutionary dogma accepted by most of us as part of our training". 1Paul Ehrlich and L.C. Birch, Nature, Apr. 22, 1967, p. 352.
The British physicist, H.S. Lipson, has reached the following conclusion.
In fact, evolution became in a sense a scientific religion; almost all scientists have accepted it and many are prepared to 'bend' their observations to fit in with it. 8H.S. Lipson, "A Physicist Looks at Evolution", Physics Bulletin (V. 31, n.d. 1980).
Dr. Colin Patterson, Senior Paleontologist at the British Museum of Natural History, by any accounting one of the world's top evolutionists today, has recently called evolution "positively anti-knowledge", saying that "all my life I had been duped into taking evolutionism as revealed truth". 10 In another address he called evolution "story-telling". 11Dr. Colin Patterson, Senior Paleontologist at the British Museum of Natural History, by any accounting one of the world's top evolutionists today, has recently called evolution "positively anti-knowledge", saying that "all my life I had been duped into taking evolutionism as revealed truth". 10 In another address he called evolution "story-telling". 11
OUR KIDS HAVE A RIGHT TO THIS INFORMATION WITHOUT CENSORSHIP!!