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)
PH,
I pass up on lots of threads.
Go take a break and chill out. Ride a bike, read a book, watch a movie, play with the wife, make a pot of coffee, anything...
Dont get so worked up.
I know what you mean. I'm sick of these Gene Men playing God and corrupting sacred DNA beasts.
A profound question deserving a profound answer.
No zot.
This thread is a mirror of the idiocy we see on DU. I refer you to the collected works of PJ-Comix's DUmmie FUnnies.
I don't know, evolution could be partly true imo only, but not in its entirety. You can't crash into a wall you build around your theory unless you bang your head on it.
Science could have been the god of forces Daniel was talking about because there was no word that I know of for science. The god of forces could be something else.
Science will end up being a false god because eventually they will attempt to and perhaps succeed in extending life to the point where it seems eternal. They have already created the means of destroying the planet and everything on it. It was allowed to happen, and man in his own wisdom may not be able to exercise proper control over it.
Christ will return to prevent the complete destruction of life and the earth. He told us so. He also told us for the sake of the elect, those days would be shortened. I don't want to engage in speculative talk about just who the elect are (this church, that church). Broadly interpreted, it would mean those who place their faith and trust in Him. I'm putting my money on the words Christ spoke.
you miss the point.
Evolution of life on Earth is independent from whatever mechanism caused the universe to be.
If the BBT is correct, fine - it produced a material universe which some 11billion years later became conducive to life developing here and elsewhere.
If the BBT is incorrect, then some other mechanism caused a universe to come into being which became, about 3 billion years ago, conducive to life developing here and elsewhere.
Evolution IS dependent upon the conditions, yes, but not on how those conditions came to be - that is what is meant by "Big Bang = nothing to do witrh evolution"
has no one ever explained this to you before?
It already has. Look at fetal tissue research and “stem cells.” Frankenstein medicine...
What if these kooks create something we cannot get rid of? I have never heard any of these august pseudo-intellectuals ask that question...
An assumption on your part...
The only evidence suggests all life, both flora and fauna, has DNA. DNA is the singularity of all life.
The “Big Bang” theory rests upon the assumption of a singularity, a point where all matter was concentrated to initiate the event.
Both the “Big Bang” and evolution theories are really inadvertent admissions by the scientific community that the universe and life are immaculate conceptions.
Stuff that in your pipe and smoke it...
Agreed, and the examples might multiply. What about genetic modification of crops and gene splicing? It's too soon to tell whether it will be boon or bust.
I prefer my apples á la Eden. I don't have a leg to stand on but my faith.
from a "life is all there is" standpoint?
1. why not?
2. we like to understand things, for the sake of understanding them.
3. we like to understand things in order to come up with technical solutions to problems which make life less pleasant than it could be.
4. Understanding how the mechanisms of life work might just possibly teach us how the mechanisms of death work, and allow us to switch off those genetic factors leading to decrepitude and death.
all, from a life-is-all-there-is, perfectly sound reasons based entirely on natural self-interest.
happy, now?
Here's a nice commentary regarding Harvard's attempt to reduce life’s origin to a “series of logical events that could have taken place with no divine intervention.”
That sounds pretty good, but can you remove intelligence from the analogy and make it work? You're equating random selection with intelligence. An intelligence is manipulating the decks to bring about a desired result. The desired result isn't known in real life and there's (supposedly) no intelligence guiding it.
ouchies. brought out the big guns.
Many Conservatives believe that threads such as this are actually helpful with respect to national politics. On the other hand, it offers no new material for most of the scientists I used to work with; they believe the GOP is anti-science. (To be sure, many of these scientists voted against Kerry though; there are few worse things than being anti-science, but Kerry slam dunked that.)
You:
Right, let's stop this article right there. Whoever wrote it needs to go back to school. Or maybe he hasn't got there yet.
Me:
Please elaborate on your objection without the insults tossed in.
"What a load of horse manure"
I know a farmer who has a sign posted on the fence out by the road that says, "Free Hay & Oats - Used Once".
So what part of the posted commentary is smelly?
" teach us how the mechanisms of death work, and allow us to switch off those genetic factors leading to decrepitude and death. "
Hey, hurry up. will ya?
Reasoning skills? Living faith? :-)
Enlighten me then. If life didn't come from non-life, than where did it come from?
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.