Fact And Theory

Message number 1417 in "Biogenesis Echo"

Date: 02-16-91 17:02

From: David Stoddard

To: All

Subj: Creationists reply

In summation, if evolution is a "fact of science" and science is

unable to conclusively prove beyound a shadow of doubt the results of

such abundances of resources, it would seem apparent that science is

not factual; but is, more rather, biased towards it's own interests.

---------------------- Let's continue the discussion

>... THEY will agree with my analysis of what constitutes "fact" in

science, what constitutes "theory" in science, ....<

I would contest your supposition that creationist scientists accept the

premise that "theory" and "fact" can be considered equally significant.

I do, however, accept the premise that the majority of degreed,

institutionally accredited, scientists are of the `evolutionary'

presuasion; NOT because it has anything to do with factually unbiased

influence.

What has happened is that this concept of evolution has

INTRUDED itself into every area of life; all social science and

humanities and even the religious entities of faith; case in point "The

master idea, which animated alike the initiator of socialogy and his

chief continuator, was that of evolution....." Encycopedia Britannica,

Vo. 20, (University of Chicago Press, 1949), p. 912.

Few institutions of learning allow acceptance and accreditation in the

vast fields of science without the unquestionable acceptance of the

evolution precept.

- THEY will agree with my analysis of what constitutes "fact" in

science, what constitutes "theory" in science, ....<

---Yes, and other anti-creationists [also, of needs in logic,

be anti-Christian], put the gun of insistance to their minds that they

must follow the leading of an imposed idea or rejection is the subtle

obvious, and you do have your concurring audience. ---------

"Darwinism removed the whole idea of God as the creator of organisms

from the sphere of rational discussion. Darwin pointed out that no

supernatural designer was needed; since natural selection could account

for any known form of life, there was no room for a supernatural agency

in its evolution. ...

There was no sudden moment during evolutionary history

when `spirit' was instilled into life, any more than there was

a single moment when it was instilled into you....I think we can

dismiss entirely all idea of a supernatural overriding mind being

responsible for the evolutionary process."01

My `personal' opinion/belief as expounded on earlier is that there can

be only two possibilities to premise existance upon. What is is because

of the spark of organic life beinging generated and furthered through

natural selection or the creative impluse of a supernatural being

established a design of personal desire. {cont. next}

NOTE, this is part one of six present parts........... et al

In this great cosmos of our existance it can summarily be projected

that we are like a child in the closet of our existance without any

memory beyound being in that closet called earth; the earth compared to

the universe is like a closet compared to the world. All the

speculations for being an existance, aware and alive, in a closet can

be rendered to life on earth.

We make decisions on which to base our understandings

of observations. The primary view accepted is that a

`study of our existance and surroundings can explain the cause of the

existance.'

One must, therefore, either start with the assumption that

God is the Creator and the Author of history, or else with the closet

assumption that there is no God and that the history of the earth and

the universe is to be explained exceptionally. If there were no

writings of testimony to the supernatural (Bible writings), God could

be, summarily, disavowed; handily rejected as without even a basis in

speculation.

Before beginning to conjecture existance, the inclination

of an assumption must be presumed; either the supernatural has effected

the natural or there is absolutely no supernatural beyound personal

imaginings. These thoughts must be addressed and formulated into any

perspective of idealisms for an honest accessment of views to be

understood.

Each of us must, therefore, either start with the assumption that God

is the Creator and the Author of history, or else with the assumption

that there is no God and that the history of the earth and the universe

is to be explained without any intelligence superior to man's.

If there were actually no God there would be no intelligence claiming

to have been involved in the developement of living organisms and the

inductive reasoning approach would be valid in accepting the premise

of atheism.

Because there is abounding evidences to the affect that

there is an entity which claims to have been fully present during this

period in history we are obligated to enact deductive reasoning to

evaluated it's substaniation. Where there are no claims to fore-

knowledge about a matter we are allowed to utilize other means to

induce an opinion.

Just as in studies of legal matters the inductive

reasoning drawn out of the investigation of the evidences are the

only means of ascertaining the facts, provided there are no personal

witnesses; whose testimony must be fully addressed and deduced.

The obvious, honest, conclusion for evaluating existance, whether of

creationism or evolution, is the deductive approach. This means that

the witness presented from Judeo-christian sources must be investigated

to a conclusive substantiation. God is either a true witness and

expositor of all the knowledge or a false witness.

The next point of concern is what is often termed the `fence

stragglers' who want to claim both camps of beliefs; the evolutionist

christian.

These are the people who reject the premise that God and

creationism and the evolutionary precept are totally opposing views.

They compound the dispute by introducing a third belief. They agree

that there is the one people who are fundamentally creationists. These

believe that God is a personal entity who created by his creative

ability.

They agree that there is the one people who are fundamentally

atheists. These believe that there is not, nor ever was any describable

entity that could be called God. These evolutionist christians are of

the opinion that God is real and that he uses the method called

evolution to develope his creative purpose. Their belief is that one

that has the most obvious flaws towards any systematic reasoning. The

attempt to present God and evolution together is against all the odds

of Judeo-Christian religions and science. This begins a lenghty,

involved, disputation:

"Evolution is a one-way process, irrevesible in time, producing

apparent novelties and greater variety, and leading to higher degrees

of organization, more differentiated, more complex, but at the same

time more integrated."02

This tells that evolution is an ongoing process of developement, that

organic and inorganic substances are progressively changing into

greater complexites.

The Bible is emphatic in representing that God caused

all these aspects, characteristic of evolution, to have occurred

only during the creation week. Genesis 2:1-3 emphasizes that God

"ended" and "finished" that process and "rested". Exodus 20:11

demonstrates that God did, in six days, make all things and "all that

in them is" were made completely done and perfected before the rest

from creating.

(Ex. 31:17 corroborates a six day creation and a seventh

day rest. Psalm 33:6, 9 tell the method of creating. Nehemiah 9:6 and 2

Peter 3:5 further impress that `creating' was "done", "made", "hast

made", "stood fast". There are no indications that time was needed to

complete the making or that some cycle of developing was only begun:

"The works were finished from the foundation of the world"(Hebrews

4:3). "For he that is entered into his rest, he also hath ceased from

his own works, as God did from his" (Hebrews 4:10).

The emphasis brought out of the Bible is that creation was completed

and terminated at the end of six days and that God is now preserving

all that he created. Nothing more is being created nor destroyed. This

truism agrees with the most basic and universal law of conservation.

"The First Law of Thermodynamics is merely another name for the Law of

Conservation of Energy.... This law states that energy can be

transformed in various ways, but can neither be created nor

destroyed."03

This understanding makes evident that this universal law squarely

contradicts the evolutionary hypothesis. That any concept of an ongoing

"creation" of increasing organization and integration and developement,

is not taking place.