Posted on 05/07/2008 5:09:16 PM PDT by SeekAndFind
“My main conflict with the evolutionists is that they wish to assert their theory as fact”
Correct. The TOE is not a fact.
As a creationist, I appreciate some logic from an agnostic. It drives me nuts that those who support the theory of evolution usually won’t let any alternate theories be taught. They usually want the only microphone.
“The best way to do that is to abolish public education,”
Agreed - and for all the ID’s out there, isnt it enough that God made the something from nothingness?
If God made everything so intelligent for millions of years, how come man did not get smart until Christ?
Why are the great discoveries not until the time of Christ and later?
“It drives me nuts that those who support the theory of evolution usually won’t let any alternate theories be taught.”
“Theory” implies there’s supporting evidence.
Young Earth creationism is faith, not science.
“We should try to keep ideological and political disputes out of the public schools.”
Unfortunately, I think that with public schools, you cannot keep the ideological and political disputes OUT. Once you have placed any industry or institution into the public domain you’ve placed it’s entire operation into a political realm, and all the choices as to how it will be run will be made politically; “What special group of people shall we consider when choosing these textbooks?”, “How best to advocate some ‘scientific theory’ (global climate change, evolution, etc., etc.,) through film events and field trips?”, “What boundaries can I push to keep these little brats under control?” Etc., etc. Imagine Nancy Pelosi running ExxonMobil, see how cheap and abundant oil will be then.
That’s your opinion, but it isn’t mine. I find evidence of a Creator pervasive in the natural world.
I believe in a Creator as well, the same God of Abraham and Israel who sent Jesus Christ as mankind’s Savior.
But I also don’t believe God is limited by what we understand of the natural world.
There is PLENTY of evidence that the Earth is older than 6000 years.
Nonsense.
... My main conflict with the evolutionists is that they wish to assert their theory as fact and to employ government power to ban discussion of creationism and intelligent design on the grounds that they are unscientific or, worse from their point of view, religious.
From this diatribe against Evolution, your first assertion is a lie.
Your second assertion is a sophism. Scientists do not claim a theory as fact. They do claim a scientific law has reached the level as a certain truth. Science is not claiming Evolution as a law.
Yes, it's taught in schools as a science because it is science. Creation is taught in religious schools because that's what they are willing to accept as truth.
If you want to be open minded you could go to a public school and to church and learn both views. No one is stopping you. For me, I don't want to waste time on creation fairy tales. I would rather review the evidence good science uncovers, so I'm happy that non secular schools stick to science.
If anybody wants to see the USSC's bogus separation of church and state disappear before their eyes, a politically correct perversion of our constitutional religious freedoms that was wrongly legislated from the bench when the Court decided Cantwell v. Connecticut in 1940, then please read the following post. Note that while the post concerns a 10 Commandments issue it is also applicable to this thread.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1992174/posts?page=22#22The bottom line, as mentioned in the referenced post, is that the people need to reconnect with the Founder's division of federal and state powers, particularly where the wrongly ignored 10th A. power of the states to address religious issues is concerned, power now limited by the honest interpretation of the 14th Amendment. The people then need to get in the faces of renegade justices and do a major spring cleaning where USSC respect for our religious freedoms is concerned. President Lincoln put it this way.
"We the People are the rightful master of both congress and the courts - not to overthrow the Constitution, but to overthrow the men who pervert the Constitution." --Abraham Lincoln (Political debates between Lincoln and Douglas), 1858.
Exactly so!
Over the years I have taken a lot of courses in diverse colleges, and your point is accurate.
I think this would be a major point of argument with many of the posters on these threads advocating a teach-evolution-only in the schools position.
Repeatedly I have read the point: "ID (etc.) isn't science." But I have never seen them post a phrase such as "We should look for and seek truth."
On a subject such as this, it would be refreshing to see them say, "We are going to look at and analyze all the points of information submitted whether we define them as "science" or not, and work toward finding a theory which best fits with all the information available."
I've heard IDers and creationists say this, but never on these threads a proponent of evolution. (I have not read every thread however!)
What do you think, pro-evolution guys? (And please no lame answers like "They have no points of evidence.")
Wow, evolution passed you by because you make no sense.
My understanding of evolutionary theory is, the existence of a Creator is denied.
Theistic evolution
Perhaps there is a reason for this. The following is from a list of definitions on a CalTech physics website (the "and science" I have added):
Truth: This is a word best avoided entirely in physics [and science] except when placed in quotes, or with careful qualification. Its colloquial use has so many shades of meaning from ‘it seems to be correct’ to the absolute truths claimed by religion, that it’s use causes nothing but misunderstanding. Someone once said "Science seeks proximate (approximate) truths." Others speak of provisional or tentative truths. Certainly science claims no final or absolute truths. Source.
It all depends on your relativistic frame of reference. In other words both young and old creation viewpoints are valid:
http://www.geraldschroeder.com/age.html
Macroevolution ideas, just like Creationism beliefs, have not been verified by the consistent results of repeatable, scientific-method based experiments. This is for the simple reason that proper scientific experimentation that would conclusively verify claims by evolutionists, such as the idea that single-cell organisms evolved into humans over billions of years for example, would likewise take billions of years to conduct; an impossibility. And then there is the "minor" problem of repeating such time-consuming experiments to verify outcome.
Also, experiments that were said to simulate long periods of evolution processes actually backfired by showing that harmful mutations could not be ignored.
This post (<-click), while addressing a 10 Commandments issue, gives an idea how FDR's disdain for 10th A. protected state powers arguably led to the USSC's scandalous limiting of our religious freedoms as evidenced by today's never-ending creationism versus evolution controversies.
The bottom line, as mentioned in the referenced post, is that the people need to reconnect with the Founder's division of federal and state powers, particularly where the wrongly ignored 10th A. power of the states to address religious issues is concerned, power now limited by the honest interpretation of the 14th Amendment. The people then need to get in the faces of renegade justices and do a major spring cleaning where USSC respect for our religious freedoms is concerned. President Lincoln put it this way.
"We the People are the rightful master of both congress and the courts - not to overthrow the Constitution, but to overthrow the men who pervert the Constitution." --Abraham Lincoln (Political debates between Lincoln and Douglas), 1858.
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.