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)
But they are not exactly good candidares for conservative thought.
And the more we learn about the spectacular intricacy and complexity of life, the more "faith" it requires to believe that evolution explains it.
When Darwin roamed the Earth, we had very little understanding of the complexity of living things, nor of the Universe. Evolution was a plausible explanation.
That dog won't hunt any more. It is utterly impossible for Evolution to be the mechanism responsible for countless living structures. On the other hand, Intelligent Design literally fills our little corner of the universe. Intelligent Design exists in an great abundance and variety. It is foolish to not at least CONSIDER that it may in fact be the driving force of the Universe.
No. In short, evolution isn't concerned with how life began, only how it has changed over time. Those who claim evolution is about the origins of life are either ignorant or liars. I know you have been told about the limits of evolutionary theory. That doesn't put you in the ignorant camp.
You mean you DON'T believe it? Then how do YOU explain it?
And the mistake you are making, is assuming that people who believe in God do not "understand" science. They understand it plenty well. Well enough to realize that evolution doesn't have any chance what-so-ever of being the explanation for living things.
But, if you have enought "faith" you can continue to believe it :-)
Then 'splain it to me Lucy :-)
I duuno about that. Most gods seem to get pretty ticked off with people who choose the wrong faith. Maybe it's safer to be an overlooked non-believer.
This is a lie. Only the MSM article alluded to this study supporting evolution. The Harvard scientists made no such claim. Because some journalist made an ignorant claim it is true? You really WILL believe anything.
Which is why Darwin title his book "Evolution - The Origin Of Species (except the first one of course)".
This is not a debate over the existance of God.
It is a debate over the continued existance of science.
why not IS an answer to why. just because you don't like it does not make it any less a common motive for human behavior.
You make a very serious basic error - you assume humans are largely rational. We are not. Your solipsism/existentialism argument would apply IFF humans were entirely rational. We are not, not even close, so your argument fails.
Whether or not there is a larger purpose to being alive than simply being alive, we have an innate tendency to value our own lives and a desire to establish patterns on the world around us that please us at least temporarily.
Basically, your nonsense is the equivalent of saying "Why rearrange your furniture, why vacuum? You'll just rearrange it again sooner or later, and the dirt will always come back"
so? so what?
Most of us LIKE a clean house, and prefer to have furniture arranged in a manner pleasing to uis at the time in question. What has passed and what is to come are irrelevant to the matter at hand.
ROTFLMAO!!!!
"...Opiate of the Atheists."
"My favorite was the response to the article that HARVARD, that "conservative" and God-loving bastion of support for all things conservative (tongue in cheek of course), notes clearly that evolution includes the origination or "genesis" of life itself."
I do not disagree with you in principle,here.
Teaching it to the kids is a good idea,
but not in science class.
ID requires a leap of faith, it cannot be demonstated, as in 2+2, or an analysis of the properties of
water, or the speed of light.
It is not compatible with the scientific method.
So it is taught outside of science class.
That is my point.
I do not see why this is a problem for people.
I know avowed atheists and the ACLU would fight having it taught in school, that there are people who believe this way.
But why would people of faith be concerned about which class it is taught in?
I would choose to trust the minds of the youth. I was raised
on heavy science/math, ended up with a strong faith. There is no conflict.
The conflict, is that the folks at the center of this are neo-creationists in a disingenuous attempt to do an end around a Supreme Court decision they do not like.
I do not think that is what you are doing, but this is why the movement will fail. Reason number two.
The first is that darn leap of faith...
Yes an intelligent designer produced an evolutionary process which in turn produced a complex design that said intelligent designer could not understand the workings of.
You asked for an example of an evolutionary process creating a complex design. I gave you one. Now you are quibbling over the origin of that evolutionary process as if that even matters. It doesn't matter because regardless of the origin, it is still an evolutionary process.
Look at it from the point of view of nature - Even if a Creator built cells (the hardware), DNA (the software), laws of nature (the algorithm, fitness function, etc), in order that an evolutionary process upon life occured, that would still be an evolutionary process wouldn't it? Just because the evolutionary process is intelligently designed doesn't make it any less an evolutionary process. If apes turn into man that is still evolution is it not? Even if a God-Researcher type wrote nature to do it.
Cool! Thanks for the additional link to another article source!
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/08/14/AR2005081401070.html
"This is too funny. Unlike evolution, at least I'm relying on DOCUMENTED RESULTS rather than pure faith based supposition :-) Oh, and I might add from multiple sources too for validation :-)"
That's a lie. Show one quote from these articles from a Harvard scientist saying this will help support evolution. Your *multiple sources* are the SAME SOURCE! They are all the same AP story, word for word! The journalist who wrote this piece is the one who has inserted evolution into it, not the Harvard scientists. Why must you Lie for the Lord? It is not even a good lie.
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.