Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

--> The Cult of Evolution – the Opiate of the Atheists
NoDNC.com - STOP Democrat Corruption ^ | NoDNC.com Staff

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 e
volution 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)
 



TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Crime/Corruption; Culture/Society; Government; News/Current Events; Philosophy
KEYWORDS: anothercrevothread; awwcrapnotthisagain; crevolist; enoughalready; evolution; evoscientology; evoshavetinywinkies; idiocy; idiots; intelligentdesign
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 701-720721-740741-760761-780 next last
To: bluepistolero
Good grief, it's just a thread.

Congratulations. You are the first person on you side to protest against the obscenities being posted by someone claiming to be on your side.

I have been wondering if Sir was a DU plant, joined up to make Christians look bad. He certainly has tried.

721 posted on 08/18/2005 5:27:44 AM PDT by js1138 (Science has it all: the fun of being still, paying attention, writing down numbers...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 706 | View Replies]

To: wallcrawlr

A very interesting perspective, and one I don't share.

To me faith is important, I don't joke about someone losing theirs. If they think something I did had a negative impact on them I will do the best I can to ameliorate the situation.

At the very least I will express sympathy when it happens "on my watch" so to speak. And anyone who jokes about it will be called out.


722 posted on 08/18/2005 5:36:43 AM PDT by From many - one.
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 638 | View Replies]

To: Dimensio; GSHastings
An explanation that can't be hypothetically falsified is fundamentally worthless because there's no way to determine what qualifies as evidence for your argument.

An explanation that can "handle" any finding at all is not an explanation. It is not telling you anything about the world. It may appear to have some sort of content. ("The world is a dream being dreamt by a giant turtle!" "The world was made Last Thursday with all of our memories intact!") However, it tells you nothing about what you can expect to see, nothing at all about what you can rule out ever seeing.

723 posted on 08/18/2005 5:39:14 AM PDT by VadeRetro (Liberalism is a cancer on society. Creationism is a cancer on conservatism.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 711 | View Replies]

To: From many - one.

When you say "faith". Please define that for me.

I am not going to be an appeaser. I expect people to mature in their faith. I expect Christians to know why they are saved. Knowing why you are saved will stand up against any offense by man. No matter if its as slight as what we are discussing or being asked to die for your faith.

God tells us to mature in our faith. If Christians dont, then they are on the wide path and its no ones fault but their own.

Hbr 5:11 Concerning him [Jesus] we have much to say, and {it is} hard to explain, since you have become dull of hearing.
Hbr 5:12 For though by this time you ought to be teachers, you have need again for someone to teach you the elementary principles of the oracles of God, and you have come to need milk and not solid food.
Hbr 5:13 For everyone who partakes {only} of milk is not accustomed to the word of righteousness, for he is an infant.
Hbr 5:14 But solid food is for the mature, who because of practice have their senses trained to discern good and evil.


724 posted on 08/18/2005 6:48:19 AM PDT by wallcrawlr (http://www.bionicear.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 722 | View Replies]

To: bluepistolero
They could ping you when talking about you, but then I suppose, that might elicit a response from you, lol.

That is correct. It's the kind of "upright" behavior that we've all come to expect from the highbrow evolutionist men of science. Here's the typical pattern: Join the thread and make between zero and two civil posts. Begin with the ad hominem fallacy and continue until thoroughly frustrated. Finish with dismissing any poster that even questions evolution as dishonest, a liar, etc., but never actually tap into that mythical mountain of evidence that proves evolution true.

725 posted on 08/18/2005 6:50:47 AM PDT by Dataman (" conservatives are retards"- PatrickHenry)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 702 | View Replies]

To: YHAOS
" Although the professor clearly is talking about abiogenesis, I don’t know that we can accuse the reporter of being a shyster."

I wasn't claiming the shyster was the reporter, I was talking about someone who says that the Harvard scientists said something they didn't and claimed something they didn't.

"The morons of the press are fully capable of misreporting most any story, but the Harvard Science Dpt’s fingerprints seem to be all over this story, it’s obvious the money is going to that department, and evolution appears to be the focus of attention."

No, the money is going to abiogenesis research, not evolutionary. Evolution is the focus of attention ONLY in the article in the AP, which included it to get flame the fans more and get a higher readership.

"I don’t think the reporter is writing anything but what he’s been told by professor Liu &c."

And you have 0% evidence of that.
726 posted on 08/18/2005 7:14:28 AM PDT by CarolinaGuitarman ("There is a grandeur in this view of life...")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 712 | View Replies]

To: Sir Francis Dashwood
"1. I'm a serious person. (caballero)

2. The guy is a Marxist troll (pinchi caverone) "

Ah, very serious person you are lol And still a coward :)
And I am still laughing at you :)
727 posted on 08/18/2005 7:24:15 AM PDT by CarolinaGuitarman ("There is a grandeur in this view of life...")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 709 | View Replies]

To: bluepistolero
Actually, no one said it, since according to evolutionists, people in the bible are just myths.

Not pertainent. Harry Potter may be a myth, but J K Rowling exists. So noöne, (even evolutionists) is denying that the the writer of Eccelesiastes actually existed.

728 posted on 08/18/2005 7:40:31 AM PDT by Oztrich Boy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 701 | View Replies]

To: woodb01

"The Cult of Evolution – the Opiate of the Atheists"

GIVE ME A BREAK!!!

This has been beat to death again and again on this forum.
You don't have to be an atheist to believe or disbelieve in evolution, and the Bible doesn't conflcit with basic evolutionary concepts.

I believe in the Bible and I believe in evolution.

Where I and the millions of other thinking individuals who believe in Evolution and the Bible differ from those few atheist biologists who do so also is that we don't believe that multiple fortuituous "accidents" of species improvement resulted in mankind, but rather that there was some direction from God.

The latter can't be proven scientifically, but then again, nor can it be disproved. Consequently it is not a scientific issue, but a personal theological one.


729 posted on 08/18/2005 7:46:15 AM PDT by ZULU (Fear the government which fears your guns. God, guts, and guns made America great.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Dimensio
How would it be relevant? Be specific.

My thinking is that if "a force that can originate life" acted at more than one point in time, then the time sequence now used is quite suspect of being accurate as a framework in which evolution occurs.

Specific example: If there are other "Burgess shale" deposits yet to be discovered that occurred at later or earlier times than we believe the actual Burgess shale to represent, that would effectively challenge the current timeline of evolution. That seems quite relevant, since time is most assuredly a key component of "change over time".

730 posted on 08/18/2005 9:12:11 AM PDT by KMJames
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 718 | View Replies]

To: From many - one.
I get pinged to a thread that is only about two hours old and it's alREADY got 629 replies!?!?! I ain't got THAT much TIME to goof off reading this stuff! Call me again when we celebrate something really big........
731 posted on 08/18/2005 11:19:34 AM PDT by Elsie (Heck is where people, who don't believe in Gosh, think they are not going....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 629 | View Replies]

To: Elsie

White Men Can't Jump

and

Elsie can't subtract.


26 hours old then.................


732 posted on 08/18/2005 11:26:24 AM PDT by Elsie (Heck is where people, who don't believe in Gosh, think they are not going....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 731 | View Replies]

To: wallcrawlr; From many - one.; narby
You had BETTER believe!!!!!

REPENT!!!

733 posted on 08/18/2005 11:28:36 AM PDT by Elsie (Heck is where people, who don't believe in Gosh, think they are not going....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 638 | View Replies]

To: furball4paws
Don't mess with ME: you'll lose your faith!
734 posted on 08/18/2005 11:36:52 AM PDT by Elsie (Heck is where people, who don't believe in Gosh, think they are not going....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 157 | View Replies]

To: wallcrawlr

Boo!


735 posted on 08/18/2005 11:37:35 AM PDT by Elsie (Heck is where people, who don't believe in Gosh, think they are not going....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 734 | View Replies]

To: Dimensio
But how can you demonstrate that intelligent design is present if you can't point to a hypothetical counterexample?

And so, your counterexample that would disprove evolution is what?

I can at least prove that intelligent design is a reality in the universe. Can you prove that evolution is a reality in the universe? How?

736 posted on 08/18/2005 12:09:38 PM PDT by GSHastings
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 711 | View Replies]

To: Elsie

LOL!

What is that a picture of?


737 posted on 08/18/2005 12:13:30 PM PDT by <1/1,000,000th%
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 734 | View Replies]

To: Elsie

"What a Difference a Day Makes"


738 posted on 08/18/2005 12:39:35 PM PDT by Doctor Stochastic (Vegetabilisch = chaotisch is der Charakter der Modernen. - Friedrich Schlegel)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 732 | View Replies]

To: GSHastings
And so, your counterexample that would disprove evolution is what?

Precambrian rabbit fossils.

I can at least prove that intelligent design is a reality in the universe.

Which doesn't prove that the universe itself is intelligently designed.

Can you prove that evolution is a reality in the universe?

Yes. Populations of organisms can be observed to evolve. This, of course, doesn't prove the theory of evolution, because absolutley no theory in science is ever proven.
739 posted on 08/18/2005 1:13:16 PM PDT by Dimensio (http://angryflower.com/bobsqu.gif <-- required reading before you use your next apostrophe!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 736 | View Replies]

To: bobdsmith
A rabbit in the cambrian would not fit evolution at all.

You say that, but since a rabbit fossil hasn't been found, you are only guessing what the response would be.

I know what they do with what they HAVE found. . .they make it fit. Example: The so called 'refutations' of Behe's book. It's all embraced by evols whether it makes sense or not.

As ridiculous as some of these are, they would all fit ID. None would fit evolution, no matter how hard anyone tried to make them.

Easy for you to say, but no evidence thus far would support your theory that evolution theory supporters in the scientific community wouldn't make them fit.

740 posted on 08/18/2005 1:36:35 PM PDT by MEGoody (Ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 619 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 701-720721-740741-760761-780 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson