and later...
Who is advocating "throwing out all of science?"
_____________________________
If you are going to say that the reason you are not T.E. is because of
the flaws you see in science, then you must throw out science in order
to retain that view.
If you are not TE becuase of issue X,
You must dismiss issue X in order to dismiss TE.
If you don't throw out science, then you are caught play judge between
what is "good science" or "bad science," something nobody is in the
position to do. Science makes errors, I'll grant you that, but it also
self-corrects. History has proven this. History also shows that in
the track-record between science and faith, when the chips are down and
a proof is made, science usually wins (i.e. the Capernician solar
system, the existance of "the vital force," the spherical nature of the
earth).
Or as you said in your discussion with Dr. Dobson when you spoke on his
show, there must be a distinction between "science" and
"Pseudoscience." You defined "pseudoscience" as "stating your theory
and then finding specific observations that support that theory,"
insted of "making observations and then forming your theory based on
the observations." You then accuse Evolutionists (I'll lump Natural
and Theistic together here for a moment) of doing this. What is
amusing to me, though, is that you didn't even acknowledge the fact
that Creationists do this as well, and to a far more vast extent. I
challenge you to prove to me based on naturalistic data and
observations the factuality of the 6-day creation event.
You see, although it is possible that God created in 6 days a few
thousand years ago (I mean that it is within His power), we CANNOT
OBSERVE ANYTHING THAT POINTS TO THIS. This is, by deffinition, a
statement of faith, which you accurately describe as being outside of
science. You see, when either side makes a claim that they cannot
support with observations, it is pseudoscience, including when it is
done by Christians. Evolutionists have a far cry more observations to
point to. They may not be able to make a perfect, unbroken line from A
to B, but they can make out the picture from what they do have.
Speaking strictly from scienctific data, I would say that evolutionists
can be about 15% sure that what they believe is correct. Creationsits,
though, have no scientificly-pure data.
So, in order to not deal with this information, you must throw it out,
and you do.
Again, I have still not yet seen an example of the hermenutical
impossibility of Theistic Evolution.
Respectfully,
J. Arthur Alley