Posted on 11/05/2003 5:29:49 AM PST by truthfinder9
All day Saturday, November 15, 2003
Most of science is an objective search for the truth.
However, the Board of Directors of the American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS) seems to abandon that concept when the discussion turns to the question of our origin. Only one answer is allowed - naturalistic evolution.
On October 18, 2002, the AAAS Board decreed that all public schools and AAAS members should censor and suppress the scientific challenge to the naturalistic explanation of our origin - Intelligent Design. Darwinists claim that life is not designed. Other scientists disagree. The AAAS, in a curiously unscientific fashion, seeks to suppress that scientific disagreement. WHY?
The fourth annual symposium on Intelligent Design, DDD IV, will address that question with 18 experts in biochemistry, neuro science, cosmology, physics, chemistry, geology, philosophy, theology and the law.
Yes, and to get somewhere in finding the truth, you have to discard the false.
"There are no transitional forms." FALSE.... And so forth. ID has nothing to offer but retreaded creationist propaganda."The second law of thermodynamics forbids the evolution of complexity." FALSE.
"Complex structures with lots of internal inter-dependencies cannot have evolved." FALSE.
"The Cambrian Explosion disproves evolution." FALSE.
If that is the case, please identify even one. I suggest you not go down that road because if you do, I will make you look really stupid.
Sadly, I don't find a rung for Network Television Producers. Maybe they're off the (bottom of the) charts, having never evolved past the form of Primordial Slime.
However, so much of the reported findings are merely opinion, isn't it true? And opininions, like fashion, come and go. Today's "truth" is tomorrow's faux pas.
That we aren't still living in the kind of world in which my grandfather (born in 1879) grew up is not because of fluctuations in opinion. Science evaluates the data, gathers more data, and re-evaluates.
Science doesn't change its "opinion" lightly at all, it does so under the pressure of facts. Hard facts are the engine of scientific change.
The history of science is a convergence upon an increasingly accurate description of nature. That should be obvious. What disturbs me is that many people of a creation/ID stripe seem ready to chuck a thousand years or so of accumulated work, eager to believe that it's all a house of cards ready to come crashing down. The attitude is lamentable.
Isn't it true not even one skeleton of a something morphing into another something has never been found?
Most fossils just lay there, yes. However, many fossils are intermediate in form between those found earlier and later. The fossil record outlines a branching tree of life much like those derived from studying the morphology of currently extant life and (more recently) molecular biology.
Darwin, faced with a much, much less complete fossil record in 1859 than we have now, was reduced to predicting that a lot of intermediates must have existed and would turn up when more of the world was investigated. Many scoffed, but he was right. Virtually all of the previous examples are post-Darwin. If he wasn't right, he was the luckiest charlatan in history. How did he do that?
Yet many people of the evolution stripe see nothing wrong in chucking 6000, and especially the last 2000 years of God's work, years that have benefitted and brought civilization to the point where it is possible to have a country such as the US of A and why do you not then find that lamentable?
To me at least, evolution is a theory that describes the origin of the diversity of life on earth. The history of the earth is what it is. Most people can handle the truth.
Thanks for your unbiased scientific opinion.
All it is then, is a worldview that you can live with. I take it that spiritual things are of no concern to you? You yourself, may consider the theory "truth", but your opinion does not necessarily make it so. Even if it be the opinion of all the world, we must say to you as Peter said to the unbelievers, Whether it be right in the sight of God to hearken unto you more than unto God, judge ye, for we cannot but speak the things which we have seen and heard.
Out of curiosity, would you die to support your theory of evolution?
Statements like that don't exactly enhance your credibility.
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.