Subject:
|
Re: Evolution vs Scientific Creationism
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Fri, 12 Jul 2002 00:46:50 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
5461 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, David Koudys writes:
> Now this is refreshing--'The theory of Evolution' and saying that it has
> nothing to do with the plausibility of God.
Well, people have been saying that all along!!!! What took you so long?
Science in general has nothing to say about faith based beliefs other than
"they are outside the purview of science". You can't use science to prove or
disprove them.
But that's not the crux of the argument.
Teaching creation "alongside evolution" is wrong because they talk to
different things.
Discussing the origin of the universe and the origins of life properly
belong in a theology or philosophy class... but that's not the bad part.
Teaching that "evolution is only one explanation, out of many equally
plausible explanations, for speciation" is wrong too. And it's wrong in a
much worse way. Because in this case it's not an undecidable apples and
oranges comparision like above... no, it's worse. It's patently false.
Evolution is the best current explanation we have and one that is in
accordance with the scientific method. Elevating other explanations to
equivalent status denigrates and demeans the scientific method, and
undermines the notion that reason/trusting senses is the most effective way
to deal with the material world. And that's morally a bad thing. Very bad.
If you say evolution is NOT the best current explanation we have (remember,
it says nothing about why the process works the way it does, or where life
came from or whether a Maker did or did not set up the rules to work the way
they do) then you are less than human.
Less than human, because you repudiate your survival equipment and prefer to
live in a fantasy land where reality doesn't matter, evidence doesn't matter
and wishes were fishes...
Well, evolution will work its way on you too in the end, whether you accept
it or not, as you're no longer the fittest. Unfortunately evolution
sometimes takes a long time to work. Meanwhile those of us that *are*
rational have to put up with a lot of nonsense.
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: Evolution vs Scientific Creationism
|
| (...) That may be true, but I wonder: When evolution is taught in schools, is it preceded by the topic "origin of the universe"? That seems logical to me, and I'd be willing to bet that Big Bang garners all of the press (to the exclusion of (...) (22 years ago, 12-Jul-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: Evolution vs Scientific Creationism
|
| (...) Now this is refreshing--'The theory of Evolution' and saying that it has nothing to do with the plausibility of God. For the record, I believe the world to be millions of years old. I believe the universe to be even older. I believe that there (...) (22 years ago, 11-Jul-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
395 Messages in This Thread:
(Inline display suppressed due to large size. Click Dots below to view.)
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
