The Krista vs. Evolution Blog 

http://www.creationresearch.org/
IN the January/February 2003 Issue of this organizations newsletter:

They discuss how Evolution Only is the focus taught in schools. They give a good analogy of why there should be equal balance on all scientific data concerning creation vs. evolution. "When we go to the ball game we want the umpire behind the plate to just tell us whether the ball is in or out of the strike zone. We don't want him to favor one team or the other by ignoring relevant data or interpreting ovserved data so that it fits a 'desired' explanation."

"Methodological naturalisim is an assumption that natural laws and chance are adequate to account for all phenomena......Scientists like Mr. Rennie really don't ask the questions: Where do we come from?. That is because methodological naturalism provides the answer before the question is asked. We come solely from unguided and purposeless natural process called evolution. Methodological naturalism assumes that intelligent causes have not operated to produce natural phenomena, even in the face of an enormous volume of contradictory evidence."

Well... that just about sums up about what I think of evolution only science as well.

And this article repeats again, why bother playing the game "questioning evolution", when the ump always calls strike on the batting team!?! People who believe in evolution ONLY and choose to ignore the scientific data of other options they are just calling the game biased and are deathly afraid of the chance of losing a fairly called game.

This paragraph I love.....

"Evolution Only proponents cannot live with criticisms of evolution, because principle criticisms deal with subjects that Darwinists must avoid, such as: lack of explanation of the origin of life and biolofical complexity, the use of a naturalistic bias in violation of the scientific method and the dismal track record of Darwinian predictions."

In other words...Darwin had a long shot of a crazy out there theory. In fact there are journal entries of Darwins partner (yes he did have a partner) that tell of scientific evidence the partner found to ultimatly destroy Darwins theories. Darwin refused to accept it and went a little insane. Misteriously this journal has never really reached the public and his theories which contradict Darwins were not given any respect or weight in the balance of the creatin vs. evolution fight. Not long after Darwin published his theories in a science journal...the partner dissapeared...hmmmm......

"The only options available to local school boards are tectbooks which teach a very subtle Evolution Only "historical narrative" about where we come from. These books don't mention criticisms of evolution or the competing design hypothesis. The books simply "teach" that we are the product of an unguided natural process- that is the message."

In March of 2002 a school board decided to set the record straight and stuck stickers on the textbooks stating "This textbook contains material on evolution. Evolution is a theory, not a fact, regarding the origin of living things. This material should be approached with an open mind, studied carefully, and critically considered."

My point exactly!

They also say that by not being unbiased in schools it is infact being biased in religion. Opressing religion in schools by only teaching evolution is infact not religiously neutral. They also mention how Gene Myers, a lead scientist on the Human Genome project was quoted as remarking, "What realy astounds me is the architecture of life...The system is extremely complex. It's like it was designed...There is a huge intelligence there."

In other words there is reason to believe that some intelligent being (superior or not) designed human life.

There is a good video being shown in schools now to help unlock those minds that were once closed to anything but evolution. The movie is "Unlocking the Mystery of LIfe and Icons of Evolution." I think we should try to rent it some time.

****

IN this newsletter they also discuss the purpose of God, or what ever you choose to call him. They discuss this in relatin to the birds, animals, plants and earth. Now, if you are wanting to prove a point, the best way to go about it is by discrediting or having the same points as those who are making the opposite point. (I know that all sounds confusing)

Evolutionists use nature and its adaptation and creation of new things to prove the theory that god did not create life. That life created itself, or was a side effect of a huge space accident is hard for me to believe, given some reading I have done on creation science.

"One major example is that most geologists no longer account for vast depths of strats by calling for the slow rain of sediments across vast ages of time. They now asser, instead, that thousands of feet of regularlu alternating sediments were deposited quite rapidly in deep-water, flood-related events. Some of these processes are called "turbidity currents" and the vast deposits they have produced are known as turbidites....."

This paragraph discusses how scientists are now going back on what they once thought was millions of years of sediment drift. Because society does not keep a close ear to these journals (most have not even heard of creation science) the people of society continue to believe that past and outdated thoughts of the same scientists that now have changed their own theories.


There is a lot of info to look through, and I have a lot of time to do it while I am here (8-5) so I will post this for now, and continue in another post.


Krista Experienced Paradise at 9:07 AM
(0) comments