Posted on 09/01/2003 5:46:19 PM PDT by Tribune7
Generations of American schoolchildren have been taught that Darwin's theory of evolution is the explanation for the origin of life -- regardless of what they might have learned in Sunday school. Yet according to law professor and author Phillip E. Johnson, this modern-day mantra of science classes is little more than a dogma of materialism. In his books "Defeating Darwinism by Opening Minds," "Darwin on Trial," "Reason in the Balance" and others, Johnson defends the truth with the intellectual clout that earned him a prestigious seat at the University of California, Berkeley, yet with a humility that can only come from knowing the Creator one-on-one. Here, he talks candidly with "Decision" on the topic he is most passionate about -- dismantling Darwinism.
Q: The Ohio Board of Education recently ruled that public schools in that state can now discuss controversies surrounding the theory of evolution. Why do you think so many leading educators fought to keep such debate out of the classroom?
A: It's a good question. You would think the Darwinists would be glad to teach the controversy as a matter of educational policy. According to public opinion polls, most of the nation has serious doubts about the truth of the evolutionary theory. Why don't the educators want to address those doubts seriously? They are afraid to acknowledge that there are any doubts that matter. Real scientists, they say, believe without any doubt in the theory of evolution. But in Ohio we had petitions signed by dozens of well-credentialed scientists saying that this area of study should be opened up to freedom of thought. Science should not be committed to a dogma -- much less a dogma that is in serious trouble with the evidence -- but should freely acknowledge areas of doubt and should address them honestly.
Q: Through your books and lectures, you've become known as someone who has worked hard to bring together different factions of the creationist movement.
A: My policy is to concentrate on the first issue: What scientific evidence points toward or away from the need for a Creator? Does the evidence of science really show that Darwin's force of natural selection is so powerful that nature can do its own creating and that there is no need for God? That's the philosophical doctrine the Darwinists propose, but my colleagues and I have shown that it is not true. The evidence, as opposed to the scientific imperialism, points to the fact that natural selection has no creative power and that the Creator is very much needed. So if we concentrate on that issue first, then we can get to other issues that are somewhat divisive within the Christian world. I have done that by saying, "Let's be careful that we start with the correct Scripture."
(Excerpt) Read more at billygraham.org ...
This is false, and is directly contradicted by posts 349 and 356.
Resistance to outside agents is not a new function. All life needs that to survive. It does not turn the bacteria into something new or into anything different or more complex. A new function would be resistance to outside agents not to a single particular outside agent. A change in hair color does not turn a woman into a new species even though it may make her look a bit more attractive. These simple changes are not evolution. Evolution requires new organs, new genes, new abilities, new functionality, and single mutations do not provide that.
I said no such thing.
Indeed you did, in post# 342 you gave cancerous melanoma as the ONLY example to justify evolution. Not only does it not justify it, but because it is not genetic and it is not passed on to the next generation, it could not have anything to do with evolution.
For one thing, evolution needs no justification.
In other ways because you say evolution has been proven, everyone is supposed to take your word for it. Sorry, it does not work that way. You need to back up your statements. For evolution to be science it has to provide scientific facts proving it to be true. You certainly cannot provide such facts - and no one else can.
You keep posting cancer as proving evolution but keep denying it!
Can you kindly give a scientific example of how evolution takes place which is not deadly??????????
Fine. You do not believe that evolution is true. You do not believe that anything proves evolution. Fine with me.
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.