Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: metmom

“Yeah, well, don’t forget that phrenology, along with alchemy, was the accpeted science of the day.”

Back when scientific rigor was in disfavor and populism dictated acceptance. As scientific rigor took sway those ideas fell out of favor. They never were popular because of anything we’d know as science today.

Creationism disallows a neutral rigor. It inherently relies on a bias in its arguments.


67 posted on 12/07/2009 8:40:50 PM PST by Bogey78O (Don't call them jihadis. Call them irhabis. Tick them off, don't entertain their delusion.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies ]


To: Bogey78O
Creationism disallows a neutral rigor. It inherently relies on a bias in its arguments.

Likewise evolution.

There are many philosophical assumptions made that are necessary for the ToE to work, materialistic naturalism not the least.

What evolutionists claim the fossil record demonstrates cannot be reproduced in a lab, cannot be tested for and has not been observed.

Variation within species and natural selection, yes. Not even creationists deny that that happens.

But the major changes that evolutionists claim happened to result in the variety of life we see on the earth today, is still in the realm of speculation.

80 posted on 12/07/2009 9:08:43 PM PST by metmom (Welfare was never meant to be a career choice.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 67 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson