Creation: We Interrupt this Series…
A Sunday guest post by my brilliant husband, Gregg.
Every Sunday, my clever husband offers me a “day of rest” by writing posts on the subject of Creationism vs. Darwinism, a subject that has broad reaching scientific, social, and metaphysical implications. For believers and non-believers alike, the primary purpose is to present scientific, historical, logical, and/or sociological data in an empirical fashion, as much as possible written in layman’s terms, and in a format suitable for supplementing any homeschool curriculum whether you choose to believe the Biblical account — or secular guesses — about the origins of human life on earth.
A Darwinian Primer
The 6 types of evolution taught in the average public school, the first 5 being types of Darwinian evolution, and the last being simple modifications or changes within kind and not even really “evolution” are:
- Cosmic evolution
- Stellar evolution
- Chemical evolution
- Abiogenesis—Life from non-life
- Micro-evolution (Changes within kind – not evolution)
The Great Church of Darwin
I began a series on Darwinist frauds a few months back. I apologize for the interruption. A recent comment made it clear to me that I had not covered my reasons for calling Darwinism a religion in quite enough detail. I will summarize those reasons here, for the record, and then continue the series of “Pious Frauds” committed by the Darwinian faithful.
A Darwinian Statement of Faith
The Supreme Court of the United States has interpreted religion to mean “a sincere and meaningful belief that occupies, in the life of its possessor, a place parallel to the place held by God in the lives of other persons.” The religion or religious concept need not include belief in the existence of God or a supreme being to be within the scope of the First Amendment.
Faithful Darwinists religiously believe in The Big Bang, that absolutely nothing condensed, then all of the condensed nothing exploded into an environment of even more nothing, that the shrapnel of the nothing that exploded defied the laws of motion and thermodynamics and became absolutely everything. This has nothing to do with science since science refutes this entirely.
Faithful Darwinists religiously believe in Stellar Evolution, that gases created from nothing defied the laws of motion and thermodynamics to condense into stars. This also has nothing to do with science or facts since science and facts entirely refute this as well.
Faithful Darwinists once religiously believed in infinity until too many people with common sense handily refuted it. Therefore, faithful Darwinists religiously now believe in billions of years, as many billions as possible.
Faithful Darwinists religiously believe the Hubble “Constant” is supposed to be used in any calculation as a “Variable.” Faithful Darwinists religiously do not believe in re-naming it the Hubble Variable, but to continue to inaccurately refer to it as a Constant so as to avoid any confusion. Faithful Darwinists religiously believe the value of the Hubble Constant can vary even within the same equation provided the end result ultimately supports Darwinism and does not refute it. This is not a scientific belief, nor good mathematics.
Faithful Darwinists religiously believe in Chemical Evolution, that newborn stars can fuse elements heavier than iron.
Faithful Darwinists religiously believe the Earth evolved out of a molten state. Faithful Darwinists religiously do not believe in Polonium Halos even though they patently exist.
Faithful Darwinists religiously do not believe that the moon is less than 10,000 years old.
Faithful Darwinists religiously do not believe that the sun is less than 1 million years old.
Faithful Darwinists religiously believe in Abiogenesis, Spontaneous Generation, Life from Non-Life, and Faithful Darwinists religiously do not believe in mathematical impossibilities as they relate to this article of faith. This is not scientific. Science predicts that we should be able to recreate this spontaneous generation event given the right materials and conditions. It isn’t happening, folks.
Faithful Darwinists religiously believe in the theory of recapitulation, formerly and erroneously called the biogenetic “law,” also known as embryological parallelism, and often expressed as “ontogeny recapitulates phylogeny” and Faithful Darwinists religiously believe it is right to ignore all scientific evidence that disputes this belief. This is, obviously, not scientific.
Faithful Darwinists religiously believe in Larmarckism, and that Lamarck’s notion of “the inheritance of acquired characteristics” is the philosophical basis of all biological Darwinian evolution and they believe it is right to ignore all scientific evidence that disputes this belief until a “better” explanation comes along. This is stubborn faith.
Faithful Darwinists religiously believe that every Scientific Dating method that supports millions or billions of years is absolutely accurate down to the minute and second. Faithful Darwinists religiously do not believe any dating methods to be even slightly accurate when those methods do not support millions or billions of years. When the same method supports billions of years and refutes it in equivalent tests, the former is embraced as perfectly accurate and the latter is assumed to be a lab error.
Faithful Darwinists also religiously do not believe in the validity of Archaeological Dating when Archaeological Dating contradicts Darwinism.
Faithful Darwinists religiously believe that continents are highly mutable things. Faithful Darwinists religiously believe in “Pangaea,” and that the continent of Africa was once 40% smaller while remaining in exact proportion to its current shape, and that Central America did not exist in the Pangea world, and that all other continents fit together with it like a jigsaw puzzle until they drifted apart — like giant lily pads floating on a big lake – after which Central America mysteriously appeared by means of a yet unknown but somehow still perfectly reasonable natural process — and that Africa increased in size by a full 40% while remaining in exact proportion to its current shape by means of another yet unknown but somehow still perfectly reasonable natural process. Hardly science. More like a fanatical faith.
I assume that faithful Darwinists religiously believe that DNA, RNA, Proteins, Amino Acids, and every part of any living cell are remarkably simple and uncomplicated structures that could easily produce themselves out of dirt or mud or some other base elements entirely by random chance. This seems foundational to Darwinism yet is hardly science.
Faithful Darwinists religiously believe that Natural Selection causes changes across every species and that, though this may appear directed or designed, it is purely random. Since science is also observable, this is not science.
Faithful Darwinists religiously believe that Mutations are mostly benign or benevolent and can produce entirely new, never before seen species even though such a thing has never been observed.
Faithful Darwinists religiously believe that the genetic species barrier common to every Animal and Plant in the known universe can easily be broken by any undirected and random process. That is pure belief in slim hope.
Faithful Darwinists religiously believe in the Geologic Column and in index fossils. Faithful Darwinists religiously believe in strata. Faithful Darwinists religiously believe that the strata is an excellent way to judge the age of the index fossils they contain and that the index fossils are an excellent way to judge the age of the strata in which they appear. That is circular reasoning at it’s finest and far from scientific.
Faithful Darwinists religiously believe that any and all evidence that could support Darwinism in even the most remote and infinitesimal way does, in point of fact, fully support Darwinism and only Darwinism. Faithful Darwinists religiously believe that any and all evidence that could contradict Darwinism also (somehow) supports Darwinism. In short, faithful Darwinists religiously believe that any evidence at all supports Darwinism. That is dogma, not science.
When it is convenient, faithful Darwinists are given dispensation to believe in the directed process referred to as punctuated equilibrium but always refer to it as an undirected process so as to avoid any confusion.
Faithful Darwinists religiously believe humans evolved from more primitive species. There is no evidence to support this and there are mountains of evidence that refutes this. The former is embraced, the latter is ignored or dismissed on the slimmest of excuses while fraud is accepted as par for the course. This is a side-show at a cheap carnival and not scientific at all.
Faithful Darwinists religiously believe there was never a world wide flood. This ignores the evidence and is therefore not scientific.
Faithful Darwinists religiously believe that similar structures, homologies, are an evidence of evolution, and not evidence of clever design. That is cherry picking and not scientific.
Faithful Darwinists religiously believe in Vestiges, useless or unnecessary structures inherited from earlier life-forms, and do not accept the notion of elegant design.
Faithful Darwinists religiously believe that the best examples of Darwinian evolution have proven salient, cogent, sound, and not at all fraudulent or worthless. That is religious fervor.
Faithful Darwinists religiously believe the Laws of Nature are completely random, not fine-tuned at all, not Anthropic, and do not directly oppose “Darwinetics.”
Faithful Darwinists religiously believe in the dogma of Methodological Naturalism in the context of Secular Humanism.
Faithful Darwinists religiously believe that Darwinism when practiced as a religion has no effect whatsoever on culture, morality, promiscuity, deviant sexual behavior, violent behavior, individual feelings of self-worth, or judgements about purpose.
When sanctioned by government, faithful Darwinists religiously believe in fanatically defending the Darwinism and fellow Darwinists — often by punishing non-believers by means of from most to least effective: mass murder, individual murder, kidnap, torture, and slavery.
Faithful Darwinists religiously believe that in the event less effective methods are available to defend Darwinism, they are granted dispensation to commit: fraud, hoax, misrepresentation, production of artificial evidence, falsely cite studies, manufacture evidence, call unqualified witnesses, engage in character assassination, fallacy, mendacity, misdirection, theft, false appeal to authority, false appeal to majority, false dilemma, and any and all other falsehoods which can be leveraged.
In defending the Darwinists faith, dispensation is granted to disobey logic, the laws of thought, and common courtesy.
Faithful Darwinists religiously believe in very carefully selecting only the data that supports Darwinian beliefs, ignoring facts and evidence that directly contradict the faith, and punishing anyone who disagrees with those beliefs.
As a point of doctrine, faithful Darwinists religiously believe in punishing anyone who introduces any contradictory facts or evidence into any public arena, especially schools. The preferred methods of punishment are firing, suing or threatening to file suit, denying tenure, removing funding, marginalizing, and mocking or making threats toward those ends.
For this and a host of other reasons, Darwinism is — in my opinion — what the Supreme Court would define as a legal religion.
Creationism is a belief system which postulates that the universe, Earth, and life on Earth were deliberately created by an intelligent being, namely God.
In short, it is my belief that natural laws and chance alone are not adequate to explain all natural phenomena, up to and including the existence of intelligent life itself. This is a belief that is shared by many rational scientists and many, many people throughout history and around the globe today.
My personal position has a deep rooted foundation in scripture found in the Bible, God’s holy word, which is relied upon for insights regarding the history of the world by secularists and believers alike.
Any reasonable observer will understand that this is not merely a dogmatic belief on my part, nor one that is outside the boundaries of logic or reason, given that the authority of scripture is a fundamental assumption on my part. And, based upon my beliefs — beliefs that are shared by countless others — I have reached a few conclusions about truth.
The truth is that we are all created from one blood, all nations of men. We were placed here not as a mathematically impossible random act, but as an act of will by a supreme being.
Believers need to understand that much of what is recognized as “science” today is “falsely so-called” and amounts to assumptions based on misleading lies, outright frauds, or unworthy (godless) assumptions. “The fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom” (Proverbs 1:7). It would be wise to take the advice Paul offered to Timothy and “…keep that which is committed to thy trust [see Timothy 6:14], avoiding profane and vain babblings, and the oppositions of science falsely so called: which some professing have erred concerning the faith” (1 Timothy 6:20–21, KJV).
This is more than a scientific debate. This is a religious debate between believers in clashing world-views.
God Bless you and yours.