Re: Note of appreciation

From: Allen & Diane Roy (Dianeroy@peoplepc.com)
Date: Mon May 15 2000 - 00:26:09 EDT

  • Next message: Allen & Diane Roy: "Re: How is this for an Anti-Evolutionist's use of quotes?"

    From: "Stephen E. Jones" <sejones@iinet.net.au>
    > On Thu, 11 May 2000 21:18:42 -0400, David Bradbury wrote:
    > DB>Upon graduation from U.of Mich. in 1949 I was a convinced (and
    > >outspoken) "believer" that evolution was a proper and sufficient
    > >scientific explanation for the origin and diversity of life on planet
    > >earth.
    >
    > It is interesting how often evolution is couched in religious terms,
    > i.e. "believer". One shouldn't have to *believe* a scientific theory-
    > one should *know* it. If one has to believe it, then arguably it is not
    > science. Or if it is science, then other things that are believed
    > should not necessarily be arbitrarily exluded from science.

    Evolutionism is a religion.

    From Merriam-Webster: Religion: A cause, principle, or belief held to with
    faith and ardor.
    This definition covers all forms of religion:

    1. Christianity
    2. Islam
    3. Judaism
    4. Hinduism
    5. Buddhism
    6. Shintoism
    7. Animism
    8. New Age
    9. Occultism
    10. Evolutionism
    11. Beatlemania :)

    While most people of the Western world tend to think of Christianity and a
    supernatural God when they hear the word religion, it really covers a much
    larger field than that.

    How does Evolutionism qualify as a religion. There are four philosophical
    tenets which must be accepted on "faith."

    1. Naturalism/Materialism: Mater/energy is eternal and that that is all
    there is.
    2. Actualism (a derivative of Uniformitarianism. The present is the key
    to the past: The same processes working today were in process in the past,
    but not necessarily at the same rates. i.e., this is Non-uniform
    Uniformitarianism)
    3. Abiogenesis
    4. Darwinism

    None of these have be proved. And since they are assumptions it would be a
    logical fallacy to attempt to prove them within any paradigm that assumes
    them true. Science can be and is done within the Evolutionary paradigm
    based on these assumptions. This religious paradigm guides the observation
    and question asking process in developing a hypothesis. Then after
    experimentation it interprets the data within the paradigm. Science does
    not and cannot prove evolution because Abiogenesis and Darwinism are
    assumptions.

    Creationary Catastrophism has its similar paradigms

    1. Creation Ex Nihilo: Mater/energy is not eternal, it was created by God
    2. Catastrophism: Global and larger catastrophes can and have occurred
    leaving their record in the rocks
    3. Creation of Kinds:
    4. Genetic Variation:

    Allen



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Mon May 15 2000 - 01:36:58 EDT