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)
I kind of thought your reply was intended that way. But I'm not very clued-in to the way these threads work sometimes, so I wasn't entirely sure.
Thanks GSH
I have replied to you and pointed out you misunderstood the information. Nothing you said was incorrect, but you misread the claim that the design did not use a clock for a claim tha the FPGA had no clock.
The claim that the design used no clock is because it exploits asynchronous logic. Unlike synchronous logic, no clock is used to control state changes.
Indeed. But it would fit intelligent design easily. It wouldn't fit evolution at all. My point is that anything would fit intelligent design.
Baffle em with BULL$HIT...eh?
ROTFLMAO...............
"As far as I know this does not fit any scientific, theological, or known model for the universe as we know it. It does, however, appeal to human imagination
It's almost as absurd a proposition as a beetle with a binary explosive morphed into it's butt. If that ever happened, you would almost have to believe in Intelligent Design. :-)
Okay tell me straight which part you don't accept:
1) Asynchronous logic can be implemented in FPGA's
2) The evolutionary algorithm used produced a FPGA design that used asynchronous logic rather than using a clock to synchronize the flow of logic.
In response to your post #628, as shown on the message, but I should have sent you a backquote just the same.
You are a late comer to this little party. Let me enlighten you as to what is "going down".
The Intelligent Design conclusion would explain anything in the fossil record. That is what I am trying to show. I am quite confident this is true. In my opinion a model that explains anything is a pretty empty model.
To make my point I list aburd things that if found would still fit the model of ID.
By all means shut me up by coming up with a possible fossil that would not fit Intelligent Design. I have tried with all my imagination, but I swear there is no such fossil.
You're not only an idiot, you're a bigoted idiot.
Lord have mercy...I think I've had quite enough of this.
" In response to your post #628, as shown on the message, but I should have sent you a backquote just the same."
Ok, now I gotcha :) I know I had also responded to a later post too so that is why I asked. Think I am going to call it a night; have a great one :)
I don't rule out the possiblity of all but one random combinations resulting in life. I rule out the possiblity of any random combinations resulting in life.
If someone can get their Fischer Chemistry set out and whip up just one combination that results in life, then they will have proven...well...uh....I guess that they will have proven that it is possible for Intelligence to create life.
Until someone figures out how life is made, no one has any basis what-so-ever in presuming that it is likely, let alone possible, for it to have occured by chance.
The problem is that there isn't an impossible fossil for ID.
I don't care if you shut up! I know thats even more of an impossibility than your example's ;)
:o
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.