Posted on 08/16/2005 11:23:20 AM PDT by woodb01
The Cult of Evolution – the Opiate of the Atheists
evolution is based on superstitious religious secular fundamentalism
for the week of August 15, 2005 - NoDNC.com staff
ARTICLE LINK - | | | - DISCUSSION LINK
(New Discussion thread, membership is free but required)
Evolution’s basic premise is that all “life” on the planet miraculously “emerged” through a bunch of accidents. Current evolution teaches that “natural selection” is how we continue to “evolve.”
Unfortunately for evolutionists their recent beliefs have been challenged on interesting grounds. A new theory has come about to challenge the blind faith orthodoxy of the evolutionists, that theory is intelligent design.
Think of it like this, evolution believe that if you have a deck of 52 cards and two jokers, and then shuffle the deck thoroughly, and throw the entire deck up in the air as high as you can, that eventually all of the cards will land, in perfect order, and perfectly aligned. The probability of this even happening one time in a billion years approaches zero. Then, to believe evolutionary "theory," you have to accept on blind faith that this same miracle of perfect order from total chaos has repeated itself millions of times to account for each of the plants, animals, and life on earth. We'll leave it there for now. It gets a WHOLE LOT MORE COMPLICATED for the evolutionary cult. On the other hand, intelligent design says that after the evolutionist throws the cards up in the air and makes a mess, the intelligent designer comes along and carefully picks up each card and stacks them all up together, in sequence, and properly aligned.
Stepping back from evolution long enough to use critical thinking skills not taught much in public education these days, it becomes quickly apparent that evolution is nothing but a silly religious belief – a type of “secular fundamentalism” – demanding cult-like superstitious faith in the impossible. If I have your attention, let’s take a careful look at what evolution requires us to accept on complete blind faith:
These are just a few of the major problems for the cult of evolution. They are certainly not the least of the problems. For example, under the “accidents” of evolution, where do emotions come from? Where does instinct come from? Why do humans have the ability to reason and understand right from wrong? And the list goes on. None of these innate characteristics can be explained by evolution.
Evolution is not science, because it can not be tested, verified, and there are no “false results.” The only “false result” to evolution is Intelligent Design (ID) because the theory of ID proves that evolution is false and therefore evolution adherents attack ID proposals with zealous fundamentalism.
Has anyone ever seen how zealously these evolutionary “secular fundamentalists” irrationally attack competing theories without answering the underlying problems with their beliefs?
Evolutionists routinely dodge issues like the origins of the universe because they know that if you stop and think hard about these issues, evolution falls apart as nothing but a widely held religious belief. If you can't explain where the raw material for the inputs to the "evolutionary process" come from, then you have no process. If you can't tell me how life started, and where its components came from, what the specific components were, what specific “accident” created “life,” then you have no process, only religious belief.
When you refuse to evaluate the inputs to a process, you have an incomplete process, it is unverifiable, and therefore un-provable, un-knowable, and an un-testable theory from a scientific perspective. You MUST at that point insert your suppositions and BELIEFS (i.e. secular fundamentalist religious beliefs) into the process. This is where it is no longer science, but superstition and blind religious faith.
It is understandable evolutionists would avoid many of these difficult questions because it exposes the preposterous "blind faith" required to accept evolution.
The cult of evolution is the opiate for the atheists.
Evolution is an atheist’s way to excuse their denial and rejection of god, it is their religion. To the degree that evolutionists dodge the difficult questions, like the origins of life's raw materials, how the five senses came about (how did one-celled organisms get the "idea" that “senses” were even needed?), how or why or where emotions come from, or a whole host of other questions, proves that it is not science, but secular fundamentalism. To the extent that evolutionists challenge competing theories such as Intelligent Design rather than answering the difficult questions or admitting that their “theory” has holes, it is not a scientific theory subject to the scientific process, but a cult based on zealous secular fundamentalism.
And on one hand, evolutionists expect you to believe that through a bunch of "accidents" life happened and "evolved" and then later, just the OPPOSITE takes place in the form of "natural selection." In other words, the "accidents" of life lead to deliberate selection. Under "natural selection" the "great god of evolution" decides who is the strongest and smartest and everyone else must be subjected to the superior race. Sounds a lot like what Hitler's National SOCIALISTS believed to me.
No amount of proving atheism, er, I mean evolution wrong will ever satisfy the secular fundamentalist religious cult of evolution. Even when those who support the theory of Intelligent Design are willing to engage in a dialog on the issue, the secular fundamentalists come out of the woodwork and shriek from the high heavens about how they refuse to prove one iota of their religious philosophy, but demand that ANYTHING that dares challenge their orthodoxy must be proven beyond any doubt. This is the essence of religious zealotry and blind religious fundamentalism--, it is the opiate of the atheists...
If those who adhere to evolution are genuinely interested in science, then they must evaluate the whole process, and if the inputs to that process, or many of its components such as the senses or emotions do not support the process then they must reject that theory (evolution) as unworkable. To do anything less is no longer science. But then again, evolutionists are not really interested in science.
Call me weak minded but I just don't have the blind, zealous, fundamentalist faith to believe that nothing created everything (the "Big Bang") and that life just spontaneously erupted from rocks, water, and a few base chemicals (evolution) through a bunch of "weird science" accidents. Step back, stop and actually THINK about the leaps of un-provable, totally blind-faith that evolution requires and unless you're one of its religious zealots, you too will reach the conclusion that evolution is a FRAUD!
Evolution, the opiate for atheists and the biggest hoax and fraud ever perpetrated on the Western World in History...
Additional Resources:
DNA: The Tiny Code That's Toppling Evolution (DNA is PROVING that evolution is a hoax)
The controversy over evolution includes a growing number of scientists who challenge Darwinism. (The fraud of Darwinism...)
Einstein Versus Darwin: Intelligent Design Or Evolution? (Most LEGITIMATE Scientists do NOT agree with Evolution)
What’s the Big Secret? (Intelligent Design in Pennsylvania)
What are the Darwinists afraid of? (The fervent religious belief in evolution)
The Little Engine That Could...Undo Darwinism (Evolution may be proven false very soon)
Why would you call a doctor when your child's life is in danger. Doctors rely on science, and science is just guessing.
that is not an "attack"
Gods Word only allows one way into Heaven.
and I dont want you to "participate", I would like you to provide the supposed post by Elsie that you are using to slander him. Please dont continue slandering people.
I consider it an attack. You may consider it what you wish.
A statement isn't slander/ libel if it is true.
More when I get back from work.
The article would make a good appendix to the book "The Republican War on Science."
You can say that again. Perhaps the maddening greed for people to have "perfect", one-stop answers, instead of a long, winding and often tiresome process of finding out the truth causes them to be so confrontational with science. Perfectionism is a dangerous disease, isn't it?
Organisms don’t ‘develop’ mutations. Mutations are random changes that may or may not be beneficial. A randomly mutated light-sensitive organ can clearly be beneficial, but the organism will need to ‘figure out’ why. And I mentioned a basic ‘eye’ to give lie to the nonsense that creationists keep mentioning about the eye disproving evolution. Not all ‘eyes’ are as complicated as ours.
On the other hand, I give you the example of a two-headed snake. They are surprisingly common. As it happens, two heads isn’t beneficial for the snake, as it can’t decided which way to go (which I find quite funny). This means that the mutation isn’t a big hit for he snake population and hence why you don’t see more of them. Yet, the mutation crops up again and again. It hasn’t come about with a ‘purpose’, though, because it’s actually a handicap.
This line cleverly tries to belittle the much more relevent, noble, reasonable and valid fact that he is striving to know more, and hasn't given up yet. Unlike the Creationists, who seem to know it all.
If they're evolutionary mutations, then they must a have a physical component. I would love to hear your explanation as to what these physical processes are, and which gene, or genes, code for them.
" Approaching truth and finding the truth are not the same thing."
I never said they were.
" I never said I had the answers or that I had any means of obtaining the answers...I never said that I have a better way to find answers, but science does not have the perfect way either. The bottom line is that nobody knows the answer."
Ah, Feyerabend. The argument from epistemological incredulity. How's that working for ya?
Sure it can. But if you don't want to see, I guess you won't see.
It has been fun guys, but I have got to get back to work.
"However, the fact that science does this does not mean that there are not in fact definite answers. In short, don't confuse the scientific method with answers. There are answers to everything. We just don't know all of them yet."
How can we know ANY of them, according you?
Physical component? Well, I should have mentioned love, hatred and other feelings fall in the realms of social, and not biological evolution. I used that misleading line directly from a question posed to me by the very person to whom I replied earlier. The pysical component for these feelings to have survived in favour of isolation, loneliness and inter-personal, non-binding hatred, is the very fact that societies which stick together, stay stronger, and last longer.
....and that the life thus created has every right to call the scientists "God."
Have you even bothered doing a google search to try to find answers to your questions? I'd guess not.
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.