The Science Corner

                                        

“For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who by their unrighteousness suppress the truth. For what can be known about God is plain to them, because God has shown it to them. For his invisible attributes, namely, his eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly perceived, ever since the creation of the world, in the things that have been made. So they are without excuse. For although they knew God, they did not honor him as God or give thanks to him, but they became futile in their thinking, and their foolish hearts were darkened. Claiming to be wise, they became fools, and exchanged the glory of the immortal God for images resembling mortal man and birds and animals and creeping things. Therefore God gave them up in the lusts of their hearts to impurity, to the dishonoring of their bodies among themselves, because they exchanged the truth about God for a lie and worshiped and served the creature rather than the Creator, who is blessed forever! Amen.” (Romans 1:18-25)

That verse comes to my mind when I read of the evidence, from advocates of Intelligent Design (good work guys), that Darwins THEORY of Evolution is flawed and untrue. I can think of no other explanation than this verse for it. Man, by his fallen nature hates God and will do anything he can to try and eradicate God from the face of his own creation. People latch on to evolution because it, in some way, soothes their guilty consciences and allows them to live like animals. However long militant atheists and evolutionists struggle to eradicate God from our lives, I can say assuredly it will be in vain. Well, Not I, but Jesus. Christians can rest assured on His promise that he will build his church and the gates of hell will not prevail against it (Matthew 16:18). That includes false scientific theories about the origins of life. However, that doesn’t mean we are to sit back and refuse to engage with the cultural debate and “let God be God”. God has ordained that we evangelise and engage with the culture. Think of the Great Commission and the enagagement of Paul with the Philosophers at Mars Hill in Athens. Too many Christians (i was once guilty of this) fail to engage their God-given intellect to enable interaction, with believers and non-believers alike, about the cultural issues of our time. Here are a few quotes that you may find helpful;

“The conclusion of intelligent design flows naturally from the data itself- not from sacred books or sectarian beliefs. Inferring that biochemical systems were designed by an intelligent agent is a humdrum process that requires no new principles of logic or science. It comes simply from the hard work that biochemistry has done over the past forty years, combined with consideration of the way in which we reach conclusions of design every day.” Michael Behe. Darwin’s Black Box, 2006

“DNA is like a computer program but far, far ore advanced than any software ever created” Bill Gates

“Throughout 150 years of the science bacteriology, there is no evidence that one species of bacteria has changed into another……Since there is no evidence for species changes between the simplest forms of unicellular life, it is not surprising that there is no evidence for evolution….throughout the whole array of higher multicellular organisms” Bacteriologist Alan H. Linton, 2001

Did You know that;

1.)The famous “ape to man” species chart is based on guesswork, not evidence. Darwin’s “evidence” for evolution amounted to “one or two imaginary illustrations” of how the process might work.

2.)Intelligent design is based on scientific evidence not religious belief

3.) What many public schools teach about Darwinism is based on known falsehoods

4.) Scientists at major universities see good evidence for intelligent design

5.) The Fossil record offers no evidence for one species evolving into another

6.)That Darwin conceded that the evidence was against him (and nothings changed)

7.) Darwinist assumptions are not harmeless- and are enforced, even when known to be wrong in schools and universities.

(All info taken from Jonathan Wells’ Book “The Politically Incorrect Guide to Darwinism and Intelligent Design”)

Advertisements

8 comments on “The Science Corner

  1. Seeing as my last response to your other “Creationism vs. Evolution” post was left unanswered (and seeing as I hadn’t come across this one), I’ll respond to the seven points you end your post with:

    1. The “ape to man” chart is a useful image to help people understand the overarching change that has affected the human lineage since our divergence from the Pan (chimp) line roughly 6-7 million years ago. Of course, the images are not exact (and no one expects that recreated dinosaurs, or images of Jesus for that matter, are in any way exact), but they are helpful devices. The chart is corroborated by thousands of fossil finds that show a change from quadrupedal knuckle-walking to bipedalism through the Plio-Pleistocene.

    2. Science is based on the construction of TESTABLE hypotheses (in other words, they can be falsified given specific predicitions). With this in mind, I.D. IS NOT science…it concludes that perceived order is evidence for design, a conclusion that cannot be tested and is therefore reliant on faith: RELIGION.

    3. What do mean by “known falsehoods?” I am a Paleoanthropologist who studies early lithic artifacts and hominins for a living and don’t know what you mean. Please clarify.

    4. What major universities? Behe and who else?

    5. The fossil record is full of transitional forms: every fossil is, technically, a transition between one adaptive plateau and another (in fact we, as modern humans, are just as much of a transitional species). I know that you want “missing links” that have gills and feet, have an ape head and a human body, but it doesn’t work that way! Evolution is a slow process that affects the entire body: a major adaptive change cannot occur without simultaneous other, interconnected, changes! Everything’s a transition!

    6. The evidence was against Darwin because there was hardly any evidence at all. People weren’t exploring if evolution could happen because that wasn’t part of the world paradigm at the time. Just as people didn’t question why they didn’t fly off the face of the earth before Newton defined “gravity,” ecologists didn’t question broad reaching, slow change until Darwin and the ideas of uniformitarianism put forward by Charles Lyell. What you have wrong in this statement is that nothing has changed: how about 150 years of archaeological, paleontological, geological and genetic research? You are just writing all of that off? We have thousands upon thousands of fossils, evidence of extinction and the rise of new species, links with out own evolutionary past both in the form of fossils and genetics and you say “nothings changed.” Please, concede this point.

    7. Science is CONSTANTLY attempting falsify aspects of evolution. Every study has the potential to do that. Evolutionary theory, though it has changed through time, has withstood a tremendous amount of scientific inquiry and remains the most complete, unfalsified explanation for not only the rise of life, but the continual existence of life in light of the environmental changes we witness in the geological record. When I say THEORY, I mean, a heavily tested explanation that has not been falsified and is widely viewed as the best possible explanation. That is what a theory is to scientists.

    Feel free to respond, I was looking forward to a good debate on the last post but that trailed off for some reason…

    P.E.T.

    • With all due respect P.E.T I must concede you have gone beyond my limited knowledge in this area. Thus, I will admit defeat, if that is what you are looking me to say? I would suggest you go to John Lennox or Alister McGrath and take up a debate with them because they know alot more about this field than I do. I’m learning as I go but I suspect I will never know as much about this field as you do, mainly because I don’t have the time to do so. It is interesting you should make a comment today because I was just in the library last night and read a book by Sam Harris. It’s very short and I finished it in one sitting. There was not one thing in the book that made me doubt my faith. He showed a terrible misunderstanding of certain Biblical texts and used this to try and present an argument. In the end it really just came across to me as another case of an atheist trying to disprove God and who has an agenda against Christianity. Like yourself, that could be a bad experience of Christianity….i don’t know. He also quoted Hitler claiming he was a Christian and that he used his Christian beliefs to carry out the Holocaust. For such an intelligent man, it is such a shame that he stopped to this level of desperation. Hitler quite clearly was not a Christian and the quote showed he had no clue of what he was talking about. He totally distorted the Bible to fit his agenda. Of course anyone can do that about anything or any book. Just because people say they are something, it doesn’t mean they are. So stupid like. Also, Richard Dawkins showed the same level of desperation in his book the God Delusion. He claims that the religious violence in Northern Ireland was due to religion- what a load of rubbish and how misleading that is. I come from Northern Ireland. The trouble was/is to do with the constitution of Ireland being united and seperate from the UK. It has NOTHING whatsoever to do with religion. It just so happens that nationalists tend to be from the catholic community and unionists from the protestant. For someone who loves facts, he gets his all wrong here. Also Atheists claim religion is to blame for violence. Does that also go for atheistic Russia’s political system as well as China’s that have murdered millions? Don’t you see? Presuppositions cause you and me to see things differently. You must believe in evolution . Your god is science. You have faith in it. My faith is in God. You have faith that it will answer all questions.

      With regards to the last dialogue we had I was working on a response in Microsoft word but I went on Holiday, contracted a case of food poisoning on the way home and simply haven’t thought about it since. I’ll drag it up for you if you want and put it on. To be honest though if you want intelligent responses from someone then look up a guy who will be able to wrestle with you about this. Could you adequately wrestle with someone in a debate about astrophysics or mechanical engineering? I couldn’t and I cannot with you as I am 22 and on a journey of discovery. I apprecaite the information you’ve shared. I’ve learnt something and will mull over it.

      Yet my belief in Jesus Christ still stands. No doubt this will frustrate you. Yet I don’t need to apologise for that. I’ll do my best to try and respond scientifically but ultimately I, nor anybody, will ever be able to scientifically explain God. That’s probably another reason why I didn’t bother to continue the whole debate. Because it will never end until the minute ALL THINGS end…be it the return of the resurrected Lord Jesus or the end of the earth as we know it due to a nuclear war or comet or whatever, if God, as you say, isn’t real.

      Check out http://www.christiananswers.net , http://www.carm.org and http://www.answersingenesis.com. These sites should be able to allow you to wrestle with things further.

  2. Listen, Reformed Pilgrim, I enjoy a good debate as much as the next guy, but the reason I’ve posted and expect a response from you is that you feel certain enough to post blogs about these topics. People reading your blogs may know far less than you in this area and take what you say at face value…even though it is highly misinformed. Write about what you know and don’t make conclusive statements about what you don’t (even if you hide behind your blogs because they are reposts of someone else’s words). That’s my case. Science isn’t evil. Science isn’t about disproving god; it’s about revealing the truth about the world and universe in which we live. There isn’t any malevolent force behind. True there are foaming-at-the-mouth atheists who will compare Christian values with Hitler just as there are foaming-at-the-mouth Christians who will compare atheistic values with Stalin. That isn’t the debate. The debate is whether scientific inquiry can be regarded as truth. I say yes, you say no.

    But your conclusions are ignorant and you should stop posting information from ignorance.

    P.E.T.

  3. P.E.T,

    Firstly, I acknowledge and agree with you that there are foaming-at-the-mouth Christians and foaming-at-the-mouth atheists. I am not one of them I assure you. I love science. I am a science buff. I have been this way since my youth and thats why I took an A-Level in Biology, but please do excuse me for my limited knowledge. I don’t know how you got the impression that I promote science as evil. That’s a clear presupposition on your part.

    You say I don’t regard scientific inquiry as truth?? Of course I do!!! I am not a person who says Science and Christianity aren’t compatible. If there is one area we can agree in todays postmodern age, it is that there is such a thing as objective truth. Postmodern Philosophical thought doesn’t believe in absolute truth- we both can agree that this is nonsense.

    You say write about what I know. Don’t try and tell me what I can and can’t write on my blog. This blog began primarily for my own benefit in collecting resources that I hope to draw upon in the future, so why should I refrain from posting things that help me learn and will be potentially benefical to me in the future.

    Secondly as intelligent an individual as you appear to be, anyone in their right mind would know that a blog is just that; a blog! I quote others who have their PhD’s or who have published books or whatever, so that people can go and check the facts for themselves. If you have a problem with some of the people I quote, then why don’t you go to them and air your complaints to them? They are the people who are leading people astray, at least that is what you are claiming. Thus, I am another poor victim of these devils who refute evolution….surely you should have sympathy on a poor commoner like me who has been so badly misinformed??

    Everything is open to critique- scientific theory is no exception nor is evolution, nor is Christianity. I can’t stop people from critiquing it. I have nothing to fear because the reality is that if ineed God is real, that Jesus Christ is the saviour then why would I have any reason to doubt. My faith wouldn’t be all that great is i tried to shy away from such debates or oppositions would it? If you guys don’t like people critiquing scientific theory then you need to learn to get over it………..and that’s a fact.

    To date you haven’t pointed me in the direction of any books I could read to improve my knowledge of your side of the argument. Why is that? Most probably it is because you are more concerned with belittling my ‘primitive’ belief in God than you are in actually me understand your theories.

    Tell me this P.E.T what did you know when you were 22? Did you know it all? Did you know as much as you do now? I doubt it. I always find it amazing how scientist’s seem to forget that they once didn’t know all that they have learnt and they look at people who don’t know as much as they do or haven’t quite grasped it with a look of contempt. Really a lot of scientist’s are intellectual snobs (I’m not saying all are- but most).

    Paul addressed such people in Mars Hill in Athens in Acts 17. It says,

    16While Paul was waiting for them in Athens, he was greatly distressed to see that the city was full of idols. 17So he reasoned in the synagogue with the Jews and the God-fearing Greeks, as well as in the marketplace day by day with those who happened to be there. 18A group of Epicurean and Stoic philosophers began to dispute with him. Some of them asked, “What is this babbler trying to say?” Others remarked, “He seems to be advocating foreign gods.” They said this because Paul was preaching the good news about Jesus and the resurrection. 19Then they took him and brought him to a meeting of the Areopagus, where they said to him, “May we know what this new teaching is that you are presenting? 20You are bringing some strange ideas to our ears, and we want to know what they mean.” 21(All the Athenians and the foreigners who lived there spent their time doing nothing but talking about and listening to the latest ideas.)
    22Paul then stood up in the meeting of the Areopagus and said: “Men of Athens! I see that in every way you are very religious. 23For as I walked around and looked carefully at your objects of worship, I even found an altar with this inscription: TO AN UNKNOWN GOD. Now what you worship as something unknown I am going to proclaim to you.

    24″The God who made the world and everything in it is the Lord of heaven and earth and does not live in temples built by hands. 25And he is not served by human hands, as if he needed anything, because he himself gives all men life and breath and everything else. 26From one man he made every nation of men, that they should inhabit the whole earth; and he determined the times set for them and the exact places where they should live. 27God did this so that men would seek him and perhaps reach out for him and find him, though he is not far from each one of us. 28’For in him we live and move and have our being.’ As some of your own poets have said, ‘We are his offspring.’

    29″Therefore since we are God’s offspring, we should not think that the divine being is like gold or silver or stone—an image made by man’s design and skill. 30In the past God overlooked such ignorance, but now he commands all people everywhere to repent. 31For he has set a day when he will judge the world with justice by the man he has appointed. He has given proof of this to all men by raising him from the dead.”

    32When they heard about the resurrection of the dead, some of them sneered, but others said, “We want to hear you again on this subject.” 33At that, Paul left the Council. 34A few men became followers of Paul and believed. Among them was Dionysius, a member of the Areopagus, also a woman named Damaris, and a number of others.

    We live in a modern day Athens. There is a cauldron of different believes, philosophies and theories. A Christians ‘job’ is to proclaim the gospel, because it is God who opens peoples eyes to the truth. In this example in Athens some believed others “sneered” at what Paul was saying. I expect nothing less today when the gospel is proclaimed. People hate it. People hate Jesus, because it gives them a problem.

    Why would the apostle’s have died for a man who didn’t do miracles or didn’t rise from the dead? Why would they have lived a life persecution if they didn’t witness the ressurrected Lord Jesus? Why would Paul have abandoned his Pharisaical persecution of Christians if he didn’t meet the resurrected Jesus on the road to Emmaus? There is observable facts that support the claim of the Bible.

    Unfortunately atheists, scientist’s or not refuse to see them or acknowledge them, just like you claim Christians do with science.

    So really we are both just as bad as each other and this revolving door will continue to go around and around and around. Which is why it comes to a point where I just say enough is enough.

    Look forward to hearing from you on my next post about evolution!

    R.P

  4. Reformed,

    Enough is not enough. You don’t think you have portrayed science as evil? The original post we are replying to begins with Romans 1:18-25, ending with “Therefore God gave them up in the lusts of their hearts to impurity, to the dishonoring of their bodies among themselves, because they exchanged the truth about God for a lie and worshiped and served the creature rather than the Creator, who is blessed forever! Amen.” You then follow that with your own words (or someone else’s, I can’t tell) saying that you think of this verse when you hear about evolution and that “Man, by his fallen nature hates God and will do anything he can to try and eradicate God from the face of his own creation. People latch on to evolution because it, in some way, soothes their guilty consciences and allows them to live like animals.” And this isn’t a “evil” portrayal (at least of evolution, which is, Reformed, a SCIENCE.

    But if it is true that you perceive science as truth, then please do look into the evolutionary literature and the FACTS that it reports. If you’d like some literature, please, find Richard Klein’s Human Career and, through your university, find back logs of The Journal of Human Evolution, Journal of Archaeological Science, American Journal of Physical Anthropology, and Nature articles dealing with evolutionary topics.

    It’s true, you are entirely free to post whatever nonsensical words you would like on your blog, but you also seem to be someone who is in search of information. I thought you might want to stop posting MISinformation, but perhaps I’m wrong. Quoting people who you don’t understand is not good research and is not a service to yourself or your potential readers. Related to this is the idea that we (scientists) don’t like critique. Are you kidding! We thrive on critique, our entire careers are based on public and peer review! Science would flounder and fall without critique! What I can’t stand is critique without a backbone, critique out of spite, critique out of ignorance, critique with no foundation in reality…and that is what you’ve been quoting and, therefore, supporting. You think you can post that “nothings changed” since Darwin’s time with no supporting evidence, that you can state that “known falsehoods” are taught in public schools without documenting a single case of what these falsehoods might be and get away with it? That’s ridiculous. Do some research first if you are going to put in the time to write these blogs.

    As far as your age goes, I can very well remember what I knew when I was 22. I’m 24 now, nearing my PhD and have worked in East Africa, the National Museums of Kenya and several institutions over the last 6 years. I understand that you are not an evolutionary expert and don’t have the time to commit to understanding all of the nuances of evolutionary theory, all of the evidence that we inherently understand because we are surrounded by the fossils themselves, but you must realize, then, that you are in no place to critique the theory or the evidence in the public sphere…that is blatant misrepresentation of our work.

    Lastly, you speak of “observable facts” in the Bible. Listen, certainly apostles died for their cause, but there have been innumerable martyrs for many religions on earth. There are monks that devote their lives to Buddha, but you aren’t suggesting that Buddhism is “The Way,” right? Joseph Smith and his followers died for the god they believed in, but you’re not suggesting that Mormonism is actually a revitalized Christianity, right? I could make this list pages long with examples of martyrdom for beliefs, however wrong they might be.

    I don’t like the cop-out that we come from different philosophies so we’ll never have common ground. We live in the same world with the same physical evidence and the same textual evidence to read. There is not reason why the debate can’t go on.

    Overall, you can knowingly continue to post information that you know little about and be blatantly wrong about it and misrepresent centuries of work, or you can be smart about it and not post until you have enough information to support your conclusions. Blog it may be, but it’s still the public sphere and by posting these ideas, quotations or otherwise, you open yourself for peer review. So welcome to the process.

    P.E.T.

    • P.E.T,

      You didnt really answer a part of my last comment when I said about the people who publish books and other material refuting evolution. I’ve read some of them. They’ve been published. They have websites. They have Phd’s. Why are they being endorsed and published if, as you claim, are false? Why do we have evolutionists who are also Christians? You are saying that evolution disproves God yet why do these folk not?

      Secondly, that passage from Romans indicates how man suppresses the truth about God. The Bible makes it very clear (as we believe in the Bible and the God of the Bible) that every human being is born into sin and has turned our back on God. What people don’t realise is that God is Holy. We just can’t grasp what that means for our minds cannot comprehend it. As such we don’t realise the deprived nature of our being.

      Atheists always zoom in on the idea of hell and a god who will judge us, but Jesus didn’t come in to the world to condemn it. He came to die on the cross to redeem whoever would believe in Him back to God, because as God is just and holy he cannot let our sin go, just as we could not let a paedophile go free. God acted out of love not condemnation. We condemn ourselves with our unwillingness to accept that.

      In relation to what you say about Joseph Smith etc I can see your point. But where you fall short is that Joseph Smith has no proof whatsoever of his story. The book of mormon has no archaelogical evidence to support its claim and has no historical support. Joseph Smith was also killed because he was in jail and was involved in a shoot out. He actually shot others . Another thing that you should think about is that if the Bibles claims are true then would Satan not do all that he could to lead people astray from the saving knowledge of Jesus Christ? Jesus warned that false prophets would arise after his departure. The reason why Christians know that Islam and Mormonism is true is because they have all the hallmarks of false religion……..an oppressive head that claims new revelation. Muhammad pillaged villages and his followers raped woman for “seeds” of Islam. Joseph Smith claimed new revelation and has no evidence to support that claim. Islam began around ca 580-640 AD, hundreds of years after Jesus. Mormonism came around only 150 or so years ago. Both fit the warning that Jesus Christ gave.

      Also the Bible warns that Satan has the ability to appear as an angel of light as do demons. What did Joseph Smith and Muhammad claim? That they were visited by two angels 1) Islam- Gabriel 2) Mormonism- Moroni. It’s for such reasons as these that Christians can refute Mormonism and Islam as false. They fit perfectly with the warnings given in the Bible.

      You may say that Jesus was just a man like Muhammad and Joseph Smith correct? But what about the records of the miracles from external sources who were anti-Christian such as Josephus the Jewish historian? The early followers of Islam and Joseph Smith, as with other Christian cults like Jehovahs witnesses etc swallowed down their stories as fact even though they had no proof whatsoever. Muhammad wrote the Quran……Joseph Smith wrote the Book of Mormon…………the Bible was not written by one man. It was written by many different authors, inspired by the Holy Spirit over more than a thousand years and it all fits together to form a coherent logical story that all points to Jesus Christ. There is a BIG observable difference there which cannot be denied.

      Also the Apostles followed Jesus because he appeared to them after the resurrection as he did to to over 500 others and more. Paul even says that he would not be following Jesus if he had not seen him resurrected and Christians likewise are foolish to follow Jesus if they deny the resurrection. The Bible is also the only book that every prophecy in it is true, apart from those which have yet to be fulfilled in Revelation regarding the end times.

      The Q,uran cannot make that claim and Joseph Smith and Brigham Young’s prophecies did not come true. The Bible says that if a prophet claims to be a prophet yet his supposed prophecy does not come true in the accurate way he/she said it would then that prophet is not of God. That’s why it is so easy for Christians to refute Mormonism. Anyone who does a bit of homework into it can see that. There is more I could put on here but for the sake of saving my own time I wont. Unfortunately Mormons and Muslims are threatened with disownment, persecution and even death if they convert to Christianity.

      So to turn this back onto yourself and the abuse you have given me regarding science….don’t comment on other religions until you know enough about the fallacies of them compared to Christianity. It’s very easy for you to say “what about Islam etc”………..i totally get that…i asked those questions before coming to faith….but what you will find is that if you actually approach this area without seeking to arrive at a predetermined conclusion, the truth of the Bible stands firm against the other religions. If you set out to disprove Christianity, you will do just that, even if you claim to be genuine in your search, apart from God actually causing you to see that it is true.

      However, ultimately because of sin we are blinded to see the truth of God unless we are humble and genuine in our search. God opposes the proud and arrogant but gives grace to the humble. God is the one who first opens our eyes to see our need for Jesus as the way, the truth and the life.

      I can only pray and have others pray that you would come to see this. Outside of that my arguments are powerless and useless.

      God Bless

      (ps if there is bad grammar or mistakes in this it’s because i’ve rushed this reply! works over and i wanna go home!!)

      R.P.

  5. Reformed,

    Thanks for the Biblical review, but I was NOT arguing FOR Islam or Mormonism, they suffer from the same fallacies as Christianity. Furthermore, I am not arguing over the existence of the figure of Jesus (for whom there would likely be historical sources, including Josephus and others…how can you ignore a figure whom the Romans hate for mobilizing the masses?). But defining a word using that same word is illogical: proving the bible using the bible follows suit.

    I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again, I won’t debate your faith! I’m not trying to disprove god! I’m trying to explain to you that there is solid, undeniable evidence for the process of evolution and that humans are not exempt from that process. That’s why there are PhDs out there that are also Christian: for them faith and science are not mutually exclusive and that’s fine with me if they can rationalize that for themselves. As for me, I have also had a long spiritual search (just as you have) but have come to dramatically different conclusions so I would appreciate a little respect in terms of my conclusions (in other words, I’m not religiously ignorant). With that in mind, I find it belittling and offensive that you would offer me prayers for something I am not concerned about.

    I’m surprised you picked out the Joseph Smith reference and wrote only on that. Let’s get back to the heart of the issue: what’s wrong with evolution? What known falsehoods are being taught? What evidence do you take issue with? Is it anything in particular? Do you think that Christianity and evolution can coexist or not? Why? What about I.D. do you see as solid, scientific evidence?

    Cheers,

    P.E.T.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s