Evolutionism is the belief that:
1. There is no God, and therefore no Creator and therefore no Law-giver.
no, this is atheism. its totally separate.
2. All life as we know it and everything that we see and live in today came from something other than God.
nope, sorry, this isn't a presupposition of evolution either. again, this is atheism.
3. Everything, all life that we see today as well as the world we live in, came into existance through an evolutionary process that took billions of years.
now you're getting warmer. evolution is a scientific theory of which there are many strains, not a religious or philosophical theory. you are trying to make a connection that dosen't exist. if you don't want to worry about whether evolution is a good theory or not, fine, but i think it is inaccurate try to make that a moral decision (ie any good christian would see it my way). now, if someone decides to take a theory and simply believe that theory is true, then that is an act of faith. but it is very possible to entertain the possiblity of the theory without taking that step of faith. and i haven't seen anyone here saying that evolution is true and must be believed by all. those defending parts of it seem to be saying merely that its worth looking into, which i agree with. it is not an issue of faith. trying to make it one is a fallacy.
You see, I think what has happened is that evolutionists -- those who believe in the religion of evolution -- have worked really hard at trying to convince people (including whole societies, such as the former Soviet Union and other communist countries--to their detriment) that their belief is true. Part of their propaganda is to claim that their belief is completely supported by science and that Creationism is anti-science.
this is a major inversion. i have spent a good deal of time living in former communist countries, studying their history, and befriending their people. the rise and fall of communism had nothing to do with how much they taught evolution. communism was about control, and when someone is controlling how much food and shelter you and your family are allowed, you aren't really concerned about his theorys of the origins of the universe. you just want him to like you. to be blantantly honest, your attempts to equate evolution with communism really smack of creationist propoganda.
Ok, so what about the 4 billion years? Well, let me ask you--produce please, if you will, one--I'm only asking for just one--piece of evidence that the earth is that old.
Just one piece please!
any college course in physics will teach the basics of radioactive decay. but for your own education, go to google.com (or your favorite search engine) and type in "how old is the universe?". here is one thing i found in less than a minute:
http://www.sciencenews.org/20010210/fob3.aspthe bible dosen't talk about the universe being that old. anywhere. so there are things that are true about the universe that the bible dosen't talk about. thats not news. the bible is not designed as a scientific textbook. if you don't care to know more, fine, but i think its unfair to claim moral high ground over those who are interested in speculating about these findings.
The evolutionist reasoning goes--
I found a 6 million year old creature A in layer X.
Question: How do you know the creature is 6 million years old?
Answer: Because everything in layer X is 6 million years old.
Question: How do you know that everything in layer X is 6 million years old?
Answer: Because we found 6 million year-old creatures such as creature A in that layer.
Um...Hello...numbskulls!!! That's circular reasoning.
name one scientist who has proposed the above theory. what you have done here is the classic strawman fallacy. you set up an incredibly weak version of an opponent's argument (the strawman), then knock it down, which is quite easy at that point. the problem is, absolutely noone adheres to the argument you propose, so you have proved nothing. as you so eloquently put it, only a numbskull would find the argument you spelled out convincing. so lets assume for a moment that there is a non-numbskull somewhere who thinks some parts of the theory of evolution carry some weight. then there must be better arguments for you to defeat. when you find the very strongest arguments of your opponent, and defeat them, than you are really getting somewhere.
i am not passionate about evolution. i haven't been around that long, and i really don't know precisely how this very large and mysterious universe came to be. but i hate to see people making wild connections and claims, when there are really good arguments for both sides that we could be exploring.
on a lighter note: i stayed at work late tonight to help a guy on campus with some computer troubles he was having. in the process of doing so, i locked myself out of my office. as it turned out, the guy i was helping works with the campus police, opening offices that people lock themselves out of! and he had his keys with him. fortuitous indeed! so we helped each other out. it was a nice moment.
and to all a good night,
brian
