Search This Blog

Saturday, October 09, 2010

Two new (to us) web links debunking Darwinism!

Darwin's God

"In a word evolution has created an atmosphere of anti-intellectualism."

Aub's World

In Isaac Asimov’s 1958 futuristic short story “The Feeling of Power,” Myron Aub is a technician who rediscovers arithmetic. Aub’s future world is one dominated by computers which do all the number crunching and people who not only are mathematically-challenged but, more importantly, don’t see the point. What good is math anyway? Today evolution has had a similar effect on our thinking. Just as computers can dull our mathematical skills, evolution dulls our critical thinking skills.

According to evolutionists everything from the quasars and galaxies in the cosmos to the millions of biological marvels on earth are a fluke. They all just happened to happen. And though evolutionists don’t know how all this happened, they know for certain that it happened. And their certainty justifies oppression of skepticism. They suppress any intellectual curiosity that doubts their dogma with lawsuits and black lists.

Modern evolutionary thought traces back to the early days of science in the seventeenth century. Over the centuries it gained strength and today it dominates the sciences and beyond. As the evolutionist Teilhard de Chardin proclaimed, evolution is much more than merely a theory, system or hypothesis:

It is much more—it is a general postulate to which all theories, all hypotheses, all systems must henceforward bow and which they must satisfy in order to be thinkable and true. Evolution is a light which illuminates all facts, a trajectory which all lines of thought must follow—this is what evolution is.

That sort of dogma is frightening. But with evolutionists, there can be no alternative. The world must have evolved naturally. Particular hypotheses may come and go, but naturalism cannot be false.

In a word evolution has created an atmosphere of anti-intellectualism. And as de Chardin forecast, evolutionary dogma has spread far beyond science. Not only does evolutionary thought pervade academia in general, but the culture at large as well. From journalism and education to public policy and law, evolution is the gatekeeper. Deep thoughts that doubt evolution’s dogma are not allowed.

This is nowhere more evident than in the various court rulings on the teaching of origins in our public schools. The most recent significant ruling was in 2005 when federal judge John Jones ruled that Intelligent Design could not be taught in Dover, Pennsylvania public schools. As with the 1925 Scopes Monkey Trial, the particular ruling in Dover was less important than the underlying message. In the Scopes Monkey Trial John Scopes was found guilty of teaching evolution, and in the Dover trial the School Board was instructed not to teach ID.

These rulings were not controversial or of lasting importance. Of course Scopes was guilty of teaching evolution, and of course the School Board was guilty of “breathtaking inanity” as Judge Jones concluded.

What was important about the Dover trial, like the Scopes Monkey Trial, was the underlying anti intellectualism that each advanced. Both trials were specifically targeted and used by the ACLU and evolutionists to promote their naturalistic agenda. As Judge Jones wrote, science limits itself to “natural explanations about the natural world.” [66-7] What Jones apparently failed to realize is no one disagrees with that limitation. Of course science must limit itself to natural explanations about the natural world. But what is the “natural world?”

Judge Jones apparently never asked himself that question and instead was swayed by the ACLU’s reasoning. ID, wrote Jones, “takes a natural phenomenon and, instead of accepting or seeking a natural explanation, argues that the explanation is supernatural.” [66-7]

It is astonishing that such a silly canard could be seriously set forth as a characterization of ID. It does, of course, no such thing. Indeed, Jones and the ACLU not only mischaracterize ID, but they evade the crucial issue. The Dover opinion makes the circular assertion that phenomena are natural and so therefore ought to be explained by naturalistic causes. Of course natural phenomena ought to be explained by naturalistic causes, but how do we know if a phenomenon is natural? How do we know that human consciousness arose by strictly natural causes? We don’t, of course.

There are different ways to handle this conundrum. ID is only one approach and certainly can be criticized. But evolutionists have not even begun to reckon with the problem seriously. Instead they evade the deep issue altogether and when asked simply lay the blame with ID.

Unfortunately, rather than transcend evolution’s low-brow critiques, the Dover decision joins right in. Yes, ID should not have been taught as Jones rightly ruled, but that was inconsequential. I was not in favor of teaching ID long before the Dover trial, and I knew no one who was. But the message from Dover was about much more than just teaching ID. Evolution’s religious dogma took another step further into our constitutional jurisprudence.

The Dover trial’s anti intellectualism will breed more of the same, just as did the Scopes Monkey Trial. Indeed, when asked about his education for the Dover case, Jones explained that “I understood the general theme. I'd seen Inherit the Wind.” That is as astonishing as it is frightening. How could a federal judge be so profoundly naïve? It would be like saying I understand the general theme of lung cancer because I’ve seen a Phillip Morris video. Like a trojan horse, evolution’s anti intellectualism has gone viral. It is now widely accepted and even federal judges take it as normative. Like Myron Aub rediscovering basic arithmetic, we need to rediscover basic critical thinking skills.







Biblical Geology Blog

"…we have allowed ourselves to be brain-washed into avoiding any interpretation of the past that involves extreme and what might be termed ‘catastrophic’ processes."



James Hutton
James Hutton

A geologist friend of mine told me recently that he is distantly related to James Hutton. That’s something of which a geologist would be proud since Hutton is widely considered the father of modern geology. Hutton’s big contribution was a fundamental principle of earth science called uniformitarianism, used to interpret the past history of our globe.

My friend sent me an article about Hutton with the following paragraph:
Another of Hutton’s key concepts was the Theory of Uniformitarianism. This was the belief that geological forces at work in the present day—barely noticeable to the human eye, yet immense in their impact—are the same as those that operated in the past. … It became evident from such analysis that enormous lengths of time were required to account for the thicknesses of exposed rock layers. Uniformitarianism is one of the fundamental principles of earth science. Hutton’s theories amounted to a frontal attack on a popular contemporary school of thought called catastrophism: the belief that only natural catastrophes, such as the Great Flood, could account for the form and nature of a 6,000-year-old Earth. The great age of Earth was the first revolutionary concept to emerge from the new science of geology. (Mathez, E.A. (ed.), Earth Inside and Out, New Press, American Museum of Natural History, 2000)
If you thought geology was an objective, dispassionate science then note the words: “belief” and “frontal attack”. Here we see some key points about modern geology:
  1. It’s based on uniformitarianism which is a “belief” about the past.
  2. Uniformitarianism is a “frontal attack” on the biblical account of Noah’s Flood.
  3. That belief leads to “The Great Age of Earth”. In other words, the vast age of the earth is not derived from an objective scientific measurement but from a subjective philosophical/religious belief.
Charles Lyell championed Hutton’s idea of uniformitarianism, also known as “gradualism”. Through his Principles of Geology (1830) he established this belief as the reigning paradigm in geological circles for 150 years until the 1980s.

However, it is now widely acknowledged that uniformitarianism is not supported by the geological evidence.
Warren D. Allmon, Director of the Paleontological Research Institution in Ithaca, NY, and Adjunct Associate Professor of Earth and Atmospheric Sciences at Cornell University said,
Lyell also sold geology some snake oil. He convinced geologists that … all past processes acted at essentially their current rates (that is, those observed in historical time). This extreme gradualism has led to numerous unfortunate consequences, including the rejection of sudden or catastrophic events in the face of positive evidence for them, for no reason other than that they were not gradual. (Post Gradualism, Science 262, p. 122, October 1, 1993)
Do you see what he said? For some 150 years geologists in their professional discipline have been consistently rejecting evidence that did not agree with their anti-biblical beliefs.

Did you notice the words “snake oil” and “unfortunate consequences”? By far the most significant “unfortunate consequence” is that geologists have convinced millions of people the Bible cannot be trusted because of their faulty belief of uniformitarianism.

Derek Ager, emeritus professor of Geology at the University College of Swansea, has said much the same thing as Allmon. Ager wrote two books advocating a return to catastrophism and his ideas have been widely taken up. Speaking of geologists’ deeply held belief in uniformitarianism he said:
…we have allowed ourselves to be brain-washed into avoiding any interpretation of the past that involves extreme and what might be termed ‘catastrophic’ processes.” (The Nature of the Stratigraphical Record, Macmillan, London, p. 46–47, 1987)
But when we refuse to be brain-washed and look at the geological evidence without its uniformitarianism embellishments we find the evidence is consistent with the Bible. It is what we would expect from the account of the global catastrophic Flood of Noah’s Day.

For a review of a biography of James Hutton see The Man Who Found Time.


When a Darwinist tells you to look at the fossil record and the sedimentary rocks?   Look.  Quit listening to him and do the research for yourself.   The evidence points to a massive cataclysmic event involving water and volcanism and rapid tectonic subduction and quite possibly a collision or near miss by a comet all followed by a few hundred years of unstable conditions including an ice age that, as it passed, helped build the great canyons of the surface of the Earth.

Very glad to add two more great sites to the links list!

8 comments:

Anonymous said...

"Observation. Whenever I pin down a Darwinist on the subjects of Information, Life and Intellect, they squirm away or try to change the argument because they have nothing to stand on at all. Nothing. "

That would be a lie. You routinely ignore our comments on these subjects, then continue to make claims like this.

"When a Darwinist tells you to look at the fossil record and the sedimentary rocks? Look. Quit listening to him and do the research for yourself."

Yes, do!

"The evidence points to a massive cataclysmic event involving water and volcanism and rapid tectonic subduction and quite possibly a collision or near miss by a comet all followed by a few hundred years of unstable conditions including an ice age that, as it passed, helped build the great canyons of the surface of the Earth. "

How exactly does the consistent sorting of fossils in the rock strata do that? This phenomenon is not compatible with a YEC/global flood scenario.

The evidence doesn't "point there", as Radar claims - it's not compatible with it.

This is not something Radar has ever been able to address. Instead he's come up with a number of half-baked pseudo-explanations: the fossils are sorted by weight, for example, or "specific gravity" - and not a single one of these untested explanations in any way lines up with the evidence at hand.

Not one.

And yet Radar has the gall to come back time and time again to claim that the evidence "points toward" a YEC scenario and makes it the more likely explanation.

-- creeper

Anonymous said...

Oh and of course fossiliferous LIPs - Radar and his fellow YECs have no answer for those either. Another instance in which the evidence not only doesn't point towards a young Earth/global flood scenario, but flatly contradicts it.

From a scientific point of view, one would have to logically discard the young Earth/global flood scenario.

Religion is the only thing propping up this outdated scenario. That much is obvious to all but those who are dying to see this scenario be true for religious reasons.

-- creeper

Jon Woolf said...

Sorry, Radar, I got to "the evolutionist Teilhard de Chardin" and once again collapsed in jokeresque laughter at your stunning lack of clue.

Father Pierre Teilhard de Chardin was far more than "an evolutionist": he was an anointed priest of God, a member of the highly respected Jesuit Order, and one of the better-known Roman Catholic theologians of his day. He was also trained in logical thought, theology, physics, chemistry, geology, anthropology, and some biology and taxonomy. He was involved in the Piltdown Man finds, which turned out to be frauds perpetrated by Charles Dawson, and in the blockbuster discovery of Homo erectus in the form of Peking Man. To dismiss him as merely an "evolutionist" is .... hmm, is there a superlative of "ridiculous"?

I didn't think anyone could so badly miss the point of "The Feeling of Power," either.

But when we refuse to be brain-washed and look at the geological evidence without its uniformitarianism embellishments we find the evidence is consistent with the Bible.

What's the biblical explanation for fossiliferous Large Igneous Provinces, Radar?

What's the biblical explanation for the highly organized sorting of the fossil record, Radar?

What's the biblical explanation for the no-young-isotopes phenomenon, Radar?

What's the biblical explanation for buried meteor craters, Radar?

What's the biblical explanation for weathered and scavenged fossils, Radar?

What's the biblical explanation for multi-layer fossilized dinosaur and pterosaur nesting grounds, Radar?

No answer was the sad reply...

radar said...

Notice that not one Darwinist commenter has come up with a source of information. I am not lying. To prove it, notice that they will still be unable to provide the source in this comment thread.

Jon Woolf keeps asking the same questions over and over even after they have been answered. Then today he added one more. Maybe two. I will not keep answering old questions I have already answered.

Scavenged fossils come from the post-flood ice age period when dike collapses and mudslides were common. Also, massive windstorms quickly buried many post-flood organisms and in some cases shortly after death when scavenging had just begun before a rapid burial.

Multiple layering of dino nests is the subject of a future post, too long for a comment thread. But keep in mind that dinosaurs lived for many centuries after the flood and the artwork and historical records for this are overwhelming. Darwinists like to hide their eyes from this fact but anyone with even the slightest desire to dig can find the evidence.

radar said...

By the way we know that many post flood animals were buried due to windstorms because of the consistent burial of especially Siberian and far northern specimens in loess = a result of wind-driven silt. There is a great deal of evidence for massive amounts of organisms buried in windstorms during the ice age period.

radar said...

Furthermore, the sedimentary rocks can ONLY be explained by a flood scenario. The megabreccias, paraconformities, the fossils that are thrust through multiple layers, the flipped or missing layers (by Darwinist thought), the specimens that contain actual remains rather than complete fossilization, the evidence of water causation for all but the top layer or two, the amazing mass of buried and preserved fossils indicating a rapid catastrophic death, the discovery that the dino footprints often are that of animals running in rapidly water, the accounts of a world-wide flood in virtually every culture on Earth...I could go on. Sedimentary rocks are evidence for the Noahic Flood. The "sorting" only makes sense in a flood scenario.

Jon Woolf said...

Scavenged fossils come from the post-flood ice age period when dike collapses and mudslides were common.

Nope. Scavenged fossils are fossilized bones and other body parts that were clearly worked over by scavengers after the organism died and before its remnants were buried and preserved. Such fossils are found throughout the geologic column, including in all the layers you claim were formed by the Flood. If all land animals were wiped out by the Flood, where did the scavengers come from?

But keep in mind that dinosaurs lived for many centuries after the flood and the artwork and historical records for this are overwhelming.

Ha to that. There is no evidence for living dinosaurs that can't be explained equally well -- or better, in most cases -- by folklore based on fossils.

I could go on.

For years, it looks like. Doesn't make any of it true. Your claims about megabreccias, polystrate fossils, and so on are geologic goulash. None of it is in any way consistent with actual geology.

Sedimentary rocks are evidence for the Noahic Flood. The "sorting" only makes sense in a flood scenario.

Why are sauropods and elephants never found together, Radar?

Why are ceratopsids and rhinoceroses never found together, Radar?

Why are ichthyosaurs and dolphins never found together, Radar?

Why are mosasaurs and whales never found together, Radar?

Why are placental mammals never found with therapsids, Radar?

Why are dinosaur fossils never, ever found above the K-T boundary, Radar?

How did the maples and oaks and dogwoods outrun the pterosaurs and dromaeosaurs to higher ground, Radar?

For that matter, what's the Flood-scenario explanation for the extraterrestrial iridium anomaly that marks the K-T boundary?

Why is it possible to identify the approximate age of virtually any fossil-bearing rock layer by the index fossils it contains, Radar?

No answer was the sad reply...

Jon Woolf said...

I could also go on at some length, but why bother? Instead I'll offer just one more example: the fossil locale known as Dinosaur National Monument. Here you can (or could, until 2006) see a huge slab of rock that is full of disarticulated dinosaur skeletons. The animals died in one event, then decayed where they fell. Their flesh rotted and their skeletons fell apart -- a process that takes weeks or months -- and only then were they buried and preserved. Do the math: this means weeks or months exposed to the air and to scavengers, at a time when Flood geology says the entire earth was covered in water.

Doesn't make a whole lot of sense, does it?