Posted on 10/03/2011 5:29:32 AM PDT by spirited irish
Karl Popper (1902-1994) was a British philosopher and a professor at the London School of Economics. Because he is regarded as one of the greatest philosophers of science of the 20th century, what Popper had to say about Darwinism is of utmost importance to the desperate political struggle fought between creationists and methodological and ontological naturalists. This is because the America of the Founding generation is firmly grounded in the Genesis account of creation, Old and New Testament morality and Christian theism, yet the original meaning and intent of U.S. law — as now controlled and defined by anti-God naturalism — has been radically changed so that it now reflects the doctrinal decrees of imperialist atheist evolutionary naturalism.
Whereas the Founding generation esteemed the Bible and used it to teach their children to read, comprehend and think logically as well as to properly train them in morality and self-discipline, in contemporary America, God, Bible, and moral absolutes have been banned in favor of evolutionary science, atheism, moral relativism, and self-gratification. The still-unfolding consequences of all of this are destructive and terrible, adversely affecting every level of society from the individual to the family, community, and cultural institutions to local and national politics.
In post-Christian America atheist evolutionism is taken for granted throughout the college curriculum, just as it is in all aspects of modern thought and experience, especially within the progressive liberal community. Evolution not only undergirds biological and earth sciences, but also Freudian and Jungian psychology, anthropology, law, sociology, politics, economics, the media, arts, medicine, and all other academic disciplines as well.
Evolution-believers range from atheists and scientists to esoteric Free Masonry, Hollywood insiders, occult New Age spiritists, Satanists, powerful Transnational Progressives, and large numbers of people who call themselves Christian. Among this last group are Liberal Christians, Roman Catholics, Protestants, Emergent Church leaders Brian McLaren and Rob Bell, growing numbers of the Evangelical contemporary Church, and an increasingly vocal community of Christian scholars and scientists such as Dennis Venema. Venema is a senior fellow at BioLogos Foundation, a Christian group that tries to reconcile the Bible with evolutionary science, and as a consequence teach that humans emerged from apes.
Evolutionary naturalism is poisoning and destroying America's traditional foundations, and when the foundations have finally been destroyed, all that is built upon them will be destroyed as well.
Americans have been deceived, and are needful of learning the truth about Darwinism — and all other evolutionary theories, by whatever name they are called.
Evolutionism: Spiritual...not Empirical
Though Popper esteemed evolutionary theory and natural selection, he also forthrightly stated that Darwinism is not a testable scientific theory but rather a metaphysical research program. By this he means that not only is Darwinism metaphysical (spiritual), but so are its' two most important foundations, classical empiricism and the observationalist philosophy of science that grew out of it.
Empiricism is a theory of knowledge that contradicts itself by asserting that human knowledge comes only or primarily via sensory experience rather than the mind while observationalism asserts that human knowledge and theories must be based on empirical observations....instead of the mind. For this reason, Popper argued strongly against empiricism and observationalism, saying that scientific theories and human knowledge generally, is conjectural or hypothetical and is generated by the creative imagination.
In other words, all three theories originated in the mind, a power of which is imagination. As mind is a power of soul, then Darwinism, empiricism, and observationalism are spiritual. In short, all three theories are frauds. They claim to be what they are not in order to obtain an advantage over the Genesis account of creation by imposition of immoral means.
In Noah Webster's American Dictionary of the English Language, 1828, soul and imagination are respectively defined as:
1. Soul: "The spiritual, rational and immortal substance in man, which distinguishes him from brutes; that part of man which enables him to think and reason."
The Founding generation knew that mind is a power of soul, and imagination the power by which mind conceives:
2. Imagination: "...the power or faculty of the mind by which it conceives and forms ideas of things communicated to it by the senses....The business of conception (and the) power of modifying our conceptions, by combining the parts of different ones so as to form new wholes of our own creation...(imagination) selects the parts of different conceptions, or objects of memory, to form a whole more pleasing, more terrible, or more awful, than has ever been presented in the ordinary course of nature."
In conclusion, evolutionism is an invention of imagination, an invention more terrible and more destructive than has ever been presented in the ordinary course of nature. It imagines that God is dead, that life somehow emerged out of nonlife, that man is not created in the spiritual image of God the Father but is rather a soulless, mindless ex-ape of evolution. It imagines there is no sin, no "hell below us, and above us only sky."
Evolutionism is an invention of imagination, and it has taken the post-Christian West by storm.
copyright 2011 Linda Kimball
But that does not conflate or translate to "they're right about age of the earth and origins of species".
This bears repeating:
“Science has provided useful information for the manipulation of our physical world to provide creature comforts. It has done NOTHING to address the real issues with which all of us as human beings, grapple on a daily basis.
It is totally useless in addressing the problem of pain, healing relationships, providing significance and meaning to life, answering questions of why we’re here and where we’re going when we die.
It’s totally inadequate to address the real issues that give life real meaning. The only really important things in life the those things which cannot be seen, which are the supernatural, which are the true reality and the only things that give life any significance and real meaning.
To try to elevate to the place of God and scorn those who don’t agree with that position to which science has been raised, it the height of hubris.
Science is a TOOL, a useful tool at that, but not a means to an end and not an end in and of itself. Science cannot meet the basic human needs.”
While I agree with the majority of all that each of you post, I would still amend the above post as:
‘Science is totally useless in the spiritual realms; which are by God’s definition the eternal and intangible, while our physical bodies and world are temporary and headed for the recycling bin.’
Don’t miss my first sentence.
Science cannot provide emotional or psychological support for one who is hurting emotionally, even if it can provide the means of alleviating physical pain.
It cannot give value to human life. It addresses the physical but most of what we’re about is not physical, even if it is not supernatural.
While science IS totally useless in the spiritual realm, it is also totally useless for the non-material aspect of THIS world. It cannot give moral direction, it cannot produce emotions or emotional support, it cannot guide a man’s thoughts and cause him to love his neighbor as himself.
amd: ‘Good thing you haven’t been defending creationism - because you would be doing a piss poor job of it.’
I’ll be frank here amd -
Anyone who places the predictions of science above the prophecy of God’s Word is spiritually dead and should be heavily and seriously questioned anytime they act as an authority on God or creation. IMHO anyone who considers evolution to be valid science are most often pompous, self-righteous and hypocritical to the nth degree.
You have nothing of value to add on creation simply because you have never studied any of it with an open mind. I feel strongly that you have also not studied the Bible in any great detail nor do you begin to understand those w/ a worldview that place God and His Word above any and all science.
I have read your prior link, and you continually misrepresent even the postings from ScienceDaily.com therefore there is no good reason for any others truly interested in truth and healthy spirited debates to read or engage your postings.
Good day Sir! I sincerely hope and pray you will someday search and find the absolute truths found only in God’s Word.
burned.......
Genetic DNA is a specific type of DNA, i.e. the DNA that is in genes. Genomic DNA, as predicted by evolutionary biology - is not as “conserved” between species.
Chimps and humans are about 98% the same in genetic DNA.
“I simply don’t “cotton” to the tactic of “I’m smart and you’re dumb because you don’t believe what I do.”
Spirited: When “science, reason, evolution” become the measure of “all that glitters”——status, power, popularity, the inside-circle, and secret gnosis, it is no wonder that those who grasp the ring of power become psychological bullies....and worse, as Nazi Germany and the Soviet Union attest to.
amd: It’s mathematically impossible to accumulate enough ‘good’ mutations to cause DNA to re-program for even 0.4% of 3 billion lines of DNA esp. since mutations are mostly harmful random changes that are highly likely to lead to extinction rather than a ‘re-programming’ and math, unlike science, acts as more of a law rather than a theory.
I’m aware you have been told this before but apparently it bears repeating to try to hold you to a higher level of integrity.
Then why does a bacteria have an error prone DNA polymerase in addition to its high fidelity DNA polymerase?
Why is that error prone DNA polymerase expressed during stress?
What would be the likely result of expressing an error prone DNA polymerase?
Does your inability to answer trouble you?
It should.
There was another poster on here that stated “there is absolutely no evidence to contradict the fact of an old earth”.
Well, actually, yes there is, plenty, and making such a statement actually reveals a state of willful ignorance, as in, not looking into or acknowledging the existance of other evidence.
oooooooo....
you know some little factoid and are trying to prove your intellectual superiority!
we’re ALL “very impressed” with you.
Yes, continue with the “I’m smart, you’re dumb, and if you were as smart as me you’d believe what I do” line of “reasoning”.
It is an example (one of many) that proves the point.
Your inability to deal with facts about the physical universe and explain them according to your very limited understanding of the world should trouble you.
So why do you think bacteria have an error prone DNA polymerase that is expressed during stress?
Do you understand what the effect of expressing error prone DNA polymerase would be?
Does your inability to answer trouble you?
It should.
Isn't that pretty much the premise of the article, with the heretics and apostates being just too dumb to know the truth of Biblical literalism?
You know what amd?
Your attempt at bullying doesn’t “trouble” me in the least.
Doesn’t truly affect the big picture. Bacterial DNA undergoes one of the fastest known re-production cycles, yet even during high stress it only produces more of it’s own kind ~ more bacteria.
How come the rare Japanese plant, Paris Japonica, has a gene expression 15% larger than the marbled lungfish, and both have a gene expression over 100 times larger than human DNA yet neither shows any superiority to mankind?
How come monkeys, are closest living relative, show no signs of higher intelligence than most any other wild animal yet many in the wild kingdom show intelligence skills in sonar or navigation far surpassing man?
Please don’t think I expect an answer. This is just an example of the circular ‘logic’ employed in old age geologic dating methods.
Did you see my post of Dr John Morris’ “Parable of a Potato Peeler” that demonstrates the assumptions inherent in the “gold standard” of old earth belief, radiometric dating?
It was in the first 100 comments on this article. I’ll try to find it. Didn’t get any comments on it, surprisingly.
Yes and thanks. I think I’d seen it in other posts as well, but too often we all forget to acknowledge the links and research shared on FR.
I do like to follow links whenever provided and have saved a collection on my links page in support of YEC.
I also enjoyed amd’s prior link too, as I was able to find additional DNA and genome information that I plan to share w/ my adult Bible study class.
Maybe someday amd will find the time to study what the opponents of old-age evolution have to say...
The analogy covers the analysis of one uranium sample. There are actually millions more of these systems of potato peelers and cutters, all working simultaneously on differernt batches of potatos. And no matter how many of them you check, they all figure out the same. All the baskets have the same ratios of peeled potatos vs parts of potatos by each different worker.
It is possible that one uranium sample would be contaminated and be "preloaded" with just the right amount of different radioisotopes of decaying uranium to indicate a false age based on radiometric dating. One potato peeler equals one uranium sample. You're theory is that all of the uranium samples are contaminated in excactly the same way, with exactly the same set of radio isotopes in exactly the right proportions to present an false representation of how long that decay process has been going on.
Did you not know this, or did you know but decide that's not something that should be included in the analogy?
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.