Is Evolution a Science?
No, Evolutionists Are Cowards Who Can't Stand Scientific Competition
If Intelligent Design were not a real science, evolutionists would not have a problem with it because, if evolution were a real science it could stand up against intelligent design if intelligent design were not based on real science.
The truth is that evolutionists do not want to admit that, scientifically, evolution cannot stand up to the science of intelligent design, so they pretend it is not a real science.
If intelligent design is allowed inside our colleges and seminaries then evolutionists do not get to brainwash our young people into believing what they know is a lie.
It is not just about religion, it is about not allowing students to consider that there may be some real scientific evidence for the God of the Christian religion.
Evolution is science falsely so called and evolutionists know it. They also know that evolution is a religion.
According to Henry Morris, Ph.D. "Evolutionists claim that evolution is a scientific fact, but they almost always lose scientific debates with creationist scientists. Accordingly, most evolutionists now decline opportunities for scientific debates, preferring instead to make unilateral attacks on creationists."
According to David J. Stewart "If you ever sit down and take the time to ponder over some of the teachings of the evolutionists, you'll then realize the foolishness of the whole theory of evolution. For example: The evolutionists teach that a giraffe has a long neck because it "evolved" over millions of years as a result of the animal trying to reach the food high up in the trees with it's mouth. Evolutionists teach that the animal's neck grew as a means of survival. The absurdity of such bizarre conclusions is obvious to the thinking individual. If the animal had a short neck to begin with, then what did it eat for millions of years? Obviously it would have had to eat food from off the ground."
The truth is when it comes to allowing Intelligent Design to be allowed in our colleges and universities alongside evolution is feared only by cowards who want to continue to monopolize the lie that evolution is a science. They want to continue their ways of brainwashing our students into believing what I think they (the evolutionists) already know is a lie.
Published by Butch West
I am just an ordinary human being that some would say has had it rougher in life than others. I see a lot of things as an opportunity, including my writing on Associated Content, Bukisa, Blogger and other s... View profile
- The Science Curriculum and Intelligent Design Debate SimplifiedIn a recent Internet search on the intelligent design debate I was struck by the jargon and avalanche of information from both sides. This article focuses on the simple difference between science and religion.
New Uses for Evolution If the Creationists Win the DebateAs the saying goes, if life gives you lemons, make lemonade. That's what we'll need to do with evolution if its teaching is banned in academic and science in America. Here are a...- The Theory of Evolution and What's Wrong with the Arguments Against itThe theory of Evolution is often misunderstood and misrepresented. Common arguments against evolution are all seriously flawed.
Evolution Vs. CreationIt is widely believed that the evidence which supports the theory of evolution and the lack there of for the theory of creation would suggest that evolution is fact, while creat...- The Teaching of Evolution in Schools, and the Intelligent Design Camp's Agenda The creationist camp has itself evolved into Intelligent Design, or I.D. In this article I outline its agenda for the teaching of creationism in public schools, and the phasing out of evolutionary theory from core cur...
- Creationism Disguised as Intelligent Design in Public Schools Violates the First A...
- Arguments Against Intelligent Design (I.D.)
- The War Between Creationists and Evolutionists Wages on Despite Intelligent Design...
- Intelligent Design Theory Supported by Satanism
- Intelligent Design: Same Old Wine in New Bottles
- Is Intelligent Design Science or Religion?
- Teachers: Teach Real Science!
- Evolution is science falsely so called and evolutionists know it
- if evolution were a real science it could stand up against intelligent design
- evolution cannot stand up to the science of intelligent design
17 Comments
Post a CommentWhy does being a young earth scientist automatically discredit the scientist? The truth is, that evolutionists would not have a problem if I said the earth is a triangle which turned into a diamond shape and is only 100,000 years old. Evolutionists deceive (in my humble but right opinion) in order to attack those who come up with alternatives which support faith. http://youngearthscientists.org/
The link states the truth
http://www.newgeology.us/presentation32.html
http://exposingliesinevolution.blogspot.com/2007/05/questions-for-evolutionists.html
"Teach ID at home, or in church. But not in public school classrooms."
Evolution does not belong in the public school classrooms either. Either allow both or allow neither. It's baloney to claim that evolution is a real science. It's not
http://evidencetobelieve.net/evidence_of_design.htm
Most of these comments are nothing but an attack on the author and those he cites (sites is a wrong spelling). Why? Because there is no scientific evidence for evolution.
(part 3) HENRY MORRIS?!?! The same Henry Morris who wrote a book (The Remarkable Birth of Planet Earth -- 1972)stating as "fact" that the craters of the moon were caused by a cosmic battle between the forces of Satan and the armies of the archangel Michael?
THAT Henry Morris?
That's enough for now. Hopefully (if you read this), you will come to understand how ridiculous your "opinion" is, and if not, perhaps some of the readers here.
Intelligent Design IS "religion" in a cheap suit. It is illegal according to the Supreme Court to teach it in public school classrooms.
Furthermore, it is NOT science in the least. It has none of the elements within it to be even a poor hypothesis.
Teach ID at home, or in church. But not in public school classrooms.
(part 2) unsubstantiated conclustions based upon luke-warm, sciency-sounding assumptions.
You said: "It is not just about religion, it is about not allowing students to consider that there may be some real scientific evidence for the God of the Christian religion." In one sentance you indicated that ID WAS NOT, but WAS based upon Christianity.
It seems that those folks backing ID are trying to distance themselves from outright claiming that the "Designer" is the God of the Christian Bible (with a wink-wink, nudge-nudge), so that tehy dont get the same legal pasting they received in Dover.
But not only are the facts against them scientifically, their own HISTORY suggests that they're surreptitiously trying to infiltrate public school science classes with NON-SCIENCE (ID). Please read "The Wedge Document" as created by the Discovery Institute. http://www.public.asu.edu/~jmlynch/idt/wedge.html
You THEN go on to quote Henry Morris. HENR
Wow. Where to start?
Agreed, you are definitely NOT a scientist (or pretending to be one), but it goes much further than that: You use the balance of your post to demonstrate that you are wholly ignorant of science (and logic) in general.
Scientists HAVE encountered Intelligent Design proponents, most notably during the Kitzmiller v Dover case in 2005. Judge Jones (Right-Wing, Conservative Judge, appointed by George W. Bush) ruled against the School Board trying to shoe-horn ID into the school curriculum. It's an eye-opening read if you have the nerve to read it. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kitzmiller_v._Dover_Area_School_District
Not only is the Theory of Evolution "Science", it is THE SCIENCE, as scored on the shear amount of evidence at its disposal. This evidence, from virtually EVERY branch of science (Geology, Chemistry, Genetics, etc) all confirm the veracity of the Theory of Evolution.
Intelligent Design? NO evidence. Merely unsubstantiate
However the giraffe would be a poor example of "design". The fact it only has 7 neck vertebrae like other vertebrates supports evolution, while a "designed" neck with more bones allowing for greater support and mobility would make more sense.
--"The truth is when it comes to allowing Intelligent Design to be allowed in our colleges and universities alongside evolution is feared only by cowards who want to continue to monopolize the lie that evolution is a science. They want to continue their ways of brainwashing our students into believing what I think they (the evolutionists) already know is a lie."
Merely claiming evolution is a lie does not demonstrate it so. Merely claiming ID is science does not make it so. The fact of the matter is that ID is repackaged anti-evolution Creationist apologetics, a fact Mr Butch West has made no effort to hide. There is no-one doing ID "research", and even those who invented it haven't managed to form
--"Evolution is science falsely so called and evolutionists know it. They also know that evolution is a religion."
Claim based on the lies of Creationists. If only just one of them could demonstrate this in a scientific manner, yet none have been able to.
--"According to Henry Morris"
Henry is a hydro-engineer and Christian apologist. He is also a Young Earther, which means he not only rejects biology, but also chemistry and physics too. That's the whole of science.
--"According to David J. Stewart"
Another Young Earther, religious apologist and apparently a conspiracy theorist. His arguments against evolution in some cases are 100 years old.
---"Evolutionists teach that the animal's neck grew as a means of survival."
As evolution is not goal-directed this is false. However the giraffe would be a poor example of "design". The fact it only has 7 neck vertebrae like other vertebrates supports evolution, while
---"I am not a scientist and do not pretend to be one. This is an opinion piece."
This quicky became clear.
---"The truth is that evolutionists do not want to admit that, scientifically, evolution cannot stand up to the science of intelligent design, so they pretend it is not a real science."
Actually they object to ID precisely because it isn't science. If there is "science" behind ID then perhaps you could be the first ever person to explain what the "scientific theory" of ID is.
---"It is not just about religion, it is about not allowing students to consider that there may be some real scientific evidence for the God of the Christian religion."
But the DI went to great pains to avoid telling us who the "designer" because identifying it as God would betray ID's anti-science Creationist roots. Are you telling us know that ID is all about not only God, but the God of Christianity in particular?
---&qu