To: orionblamblam
In 1995, the official Position Statement of the American National Association of Biology Teachers (NABT) accurately states the general understanding of major science organizations and educators:
The diversity of life on earth is the outcome of evolution: an unsupervised, impersonal, unpredictable, and natural process of temporal descent with genetic modification that is affected by natural selection, chance, historical contingencies and changing environments.
Or in the words of the famous evolutionist, George Gaylord Simpson, "Man is the result of a purposeless, and natural process that did not have him in mind."
How do they know the process was unsupervised?
How do they know the process was mindless?
How do they know the process was purposeless?
Their statements are problematic in that they are unscientific. It cannot be proven that evolutionary processes are "purposeless" or that humans were "not in mind." Science cannot demonstrate these assumptions either way ... and that's the problem with their position. They become proponents of a religion of atheism; I say religion because their conclusion is NOT science, it is faith ... just as much as OUR conclusion is faith. Clearly, their definition is diametrically opposed to any concept of a personal creator being involved in the evolutionary process.
192 posted on
03/14/2006 5:02:33 PM PST by
GarySpFc
(de oppresso liber)
To: GarySpFc
It cannot be proven that evolutionary processes are "purposeless" or that humans were "not in mind." Science cannot demonstrate these assumptions either way ... and that's the problem with their position. They become proponents of a religion of atheism; I say religion because their conclusion is NOT science, it is faith ... just as much as OUR conclusion is faith. You are attempting to denigrate evolution by saying it is a religion? Do you not see some logical problem with this?
194 posted on
03/14/2006 7:03:35 PM PST by
Coyoteman
(I love the sound of beta decay in the morning!)
To: GarySpFc
> I say religion because their conclusion is NOT science, it is faith ...
There's generally a little bit more to religion than just scientifically unproven faith.
199 posted on
03/14/2006 8:54:09 PM PST by
orionblamblam
(A furore Normannorum libra nos, Domine)
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson