Posted on 08/16/2005 11:23:20 AM PDT by woodb01
The Cult of Evolution – the Opiate of the Atheists
evolution is based on superstitious religious secular fundamentalism
for the week of August 15, 2005 - NoDNC.com staff
ARTICLE LINK - | | | - DISCUSSION LINK
(New Discussion thread, membership is free but required)
Evolution’s basic premise is that all “life” on the planet miraculously “emerged” through a bunch of accidents. Current evolution teaches that “natural selection” is how we continue to “evolve.”
Unfortunately for evolutionists their recent beliefs have been challenged on interesting grounds. A new theory has come about to challenge the blind faith orthodoxy of the evolutionists, that theory is intelligent design.
Think of it like this, evolution believe that if you have a deck of 52 cards and two jokers, and then shuffle the deck thoroughly, and throw the entire deck up in the air as high as you can, that eventually all of the cards will land, in perfect order, and perfectly aligned. The probability of this even happening one time in a billion years approaches zero. Then, to believe evolutionary "theory," you have to accept on blind faith that this same miracle of perfect order from total chaos has repeated itself millions of times to account for each of the plants, animals, and life on earth. We'll leave it there for now. It gets a WHOLE LOT MORE COMPLICATED for the evolutionary cult. On the other hand, intelligent design says that after the evolutionist throws the cards up in the air and makes a mess, the intelligent designer comes along and carefully picks up each card and stacks them all up together, in sequence, and properly aligned.
Stepping back from evolution long enough to use critical thinking skills not taught much in public education these days, it becomes quickly apparent that evolution is nothing but a silly religious belief – a type of “secular fundamentalism” – demanding cult-like superstitious faith in the impossible. If I have your attention, let’s take a careful look at what evolution requires us to accept on complete blind faith:
These are just a few of the major problems for the cult of evolution. They are certainly not the least of the problems. For example, under the “accidents” of evolution, where do emotions come from? Where does instinct come from? Why do humans have the ability to reason and understand right from wrong? And the list goes on. None of these innate characteristics can be explained by evolution.
Evolution is not science, because it can not be tested, verified, and there are no “false results.” The only “false result” to evolution is Intelligent Design (ID) because the theory of ID proves that evolution is false and therefore evolution adherents attack ID proposals with zealous fundamentalism.
Has anyone ever seen how zealously these evolutionary “secular fundamentalists” irrationally attack competing theories without answering the underlying problems with their beliefs?
Evolutionists routinely dodge issues like the origins of the universe because they know that if you stop and think hard about these issues, evolution falls apart as nothing but a widely held religious belief. If you can't explain where the raw material for the inputs to the "evolutionary process" come from, then you have no process. If you can't tell me how life started, and where its components came from, what the specific components were, what specific “accident” created “life,” then you have no process, only religious belief.
When you refuse to evaluate the inputs to a process, you have an incomplete process, it is unverifiable, and therefore un-provable, un-knowable, and an un-testable theory from a scientific perspective. You MUST at that point insert your suppositions and BELIEFS (i.e. secular fundamentalist religious beliefs) into the process. This is where it is no longer science, but superstition and blind religious faith.
It is understandable evolutionists would avoid many of these difficult questions because it exposes the preposterous "blind faith" required to accept evolution.
The cult of evolution is the opiate for the atheists.
Evolution is an atheist’s way to excuse their denial and rejection of god, it is their religion. To the degree that evolutionists dodge the difficult questions, like the origins of life's raw materials, how the five senses came about (how did one-celled organisms get the "idea" that “senses” were even needed?), how or why or where emotions come from, or a whole host of other questions, proves that it is not science, but secular fundamentalism. To the extent that evolutionists challenge competing theories such as Intelligent Design rather than answering the difficult questions or admitting that their “theory” has holes, it is not a scientific theory subject to the scientific process, but a cult based on zealous secular fundamentalism.
And on one hand, evolutionists expect you to believe that through a bunch of "accidents" life happened and "evolved" and then later, just the OPPOSITE takes place in the form of "natural selection." In other words, the "accidents" of life lead to deliberate selection. Under "natural selection" the "great god of evolution" decides who is the strongest and smartest and everyone else must be subjected to the superior race. Sounds a lot like what Hitler's National SOCIALISTS believed to me.
No amount of proving atheism, er, I mean evolution wrong will ever satisfy the secular fundamentalist religious cult of evolution. Even when those who support the theory of Intelligent Design are willing to engage in a dialog on the issue, the secular fundamentalists come out of the woodwork and shriek from the high heavens about how they refuse to prove one iota of their religious philosophy, but demand that ANYTHING that dares challenge their orthodoxy must be proven beyond any doubt. This is the essence of religious zealotry and blind religious fundamentalism--, it is the opiate of the atheists...
If those who adhere to evolution are genuinely interested in science, then they must evaluate the whole process, and if the inputs to that process, or many of its components such as the senses or emotions do not support the process then they must reject that theory (evolution) as unworkable. To do anything less is no longer science. But then again, evolutionists are not really interested in science.
Call me weak minded but I just don't have the blind, zealous, fundamentalist faith to believe that nothing created everything (the "Big Bang") and that life just spontaneously erupted from rocks, water, and a few base chemicals (evolution) through a bunch of "weird science" accidents. Step back, stop and actually THINK about the leaps of un-provable, totally blind-faith that evolution requires and unless you're one of its religious zealots, you too will reach the conclusion that evolution is a FRAUD!
Evolution, the opiate for atheists and the biggest hoax and fraud ever perpetrated on the Western World in History...
Additional Resources:
DNA: The Tiny Code That's Toppling Evolution (DNA is PROVING that evolution is a hoax)
The controversy over evolution includes a growing number of scientists who challenge Darwinism. (The fraud of Darwinism...)
Einstein Versus Darwin: Intelligent Design Or Evolution? (Most LEGITIMATE Scientists do NOT agree with Evolution)
What’s the Big Secret? (Intelligent Design in Pennsylvania)
What are the Darwinists afraid of? (The fervent religious belief in evolution)
The Little Engine That Could...Undo Darwinism (Evolution may be proven false very soon)
:)
So there is no positive "theory" of ID (but we knew that already), only alleged "evidence" against "Darwinism".
So what is this evidence of which you speak?
They were the gases that existed before any life was created. There was some scientist at Berkley that tried to prove that the gases could have formed the basis for human life. I don't remember the specifics, but that was what science was claiming at the time. It may be nonsense now (I thought it was then), but that is what was being taught in public schools.
"Braaaaaaiiiiiiiinnnnnnnns!"
OK, to spell it out a bit more clearly. It would seem to me that if scientists create life where none was before and where none exists without intervention, then that is a demonstration that intelligence creates life. Your rebut is not on point.
"If we create silk in the laboratory, does that mean it isn't made by spiders? If we model the workings of a volcano in supercomputers, does that mean volcanos are designed?"
*Sigh* It’s not Just a guess. It is a theory backed by evidence. There’s plenty out there, you know.
Science never claims to be perfect, but it does have methods for filtering out much of the real garbage.
"Before the Big Bang" is a meaningless construct - time started with the Big Bang. There is no "before".
You can spin it all you want, but a theory is not a fact. If you don't know that, then you really don't know much.
The title alone makes me sigh good grief.
I know a few agnostics and an athiest. They are among thefinest, most idealistic folk I know.
Yor premise seems to be a bit odd... that if their is no God, there is no purpose or reason to life. There was a long time before the Judeo Christian God came to be perceived, yet in early writings, ad those of cultures that do not include the concept, there seems to be no sign of such depressive attitude.
Look, I am not a physicist, and am in no way capable of defending what I don't know. I am of the opinion that Creationists are envious of the scientists, and are all out to prove them wrong, especially in subjects where they have no scratching knowledge of the proposed scientific explanations and arguments. Outright rejection without proper study is their motto, and it was popular in the Dark Ages too. I'd believe a creationist who can explain to me what the 'String Theory' is all about, and how gravity attracts mass, and how mass develops gravity.
Have they ever communicated to you the basis of their meaning and purpose? I am asking this question sincerely.
Don't you see that if we are merely products of evolution, then emotions (love, hate, envy, etc) as well as our efforts to improve our condition and our chance for survival are merely evolutionary processes and nothing more. To assign any meaning to loving someone or striving to invent a vaccine or even working to develop a food source to feed millions is nothing but folly. At that point, we are no different than that lion on the African plain who acts as if it actually makes a difference whether it procreates or not.
You say atheism does not equal nihilism. How can it not? Further, I would make the claim that any atheist who claims to have meaning and purpose in his or her life would, upon self-inspection, find an inconsistancy in his or her worldview.
I agree. Some of my best friends live in horse manure. Nothing could live in this thread.
I personally think these particular creationists in the article are a bunch of whackos. I also believe that God exists and that evolution is his (or its) way of doing things. If that makes me some kind of a heretic, then so be it. ID is the right's version of junk science.
Can you recall the evolutionary mechanism that involved gases?
I've never heard of such a thing and can't imagine how it would word.
Did a pre-ape inhale some kind of change-gas or what?
It has a different meaning.
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.