|
|
 |
|
|
| Creationist Skeptics, Evolution and Religion |
 |
Creationists are the ultimate skeptics
http://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?chanId=sa013
&articleId=000D4FEC-7D5B-1D07-8E49809EC588EED
F&modsrc=most_popular
http://saintgasoline.com/2007/04/01/if-creati
onists-held-their-religion-to-the-same-unreas
onable-standards-they-set-for-evolution/
Creationists are the ultimate skeptics. They
will believe in men being raised from the
dead and talking ghosts that can impregnate
virgins without even a shred of evidence, but
when confronted with the evidence for
biological evolution they transform into
staunch critics upholding the highest burdens
of proof ever constructed.
The theory of evolution is actually supported
with a wide array of evidence. Evolution is
right up there with basic principles of
elementary physics in terms of observational
support. In the face of such overwhelming
evidence, critics adopt standards of such
unreasonableness that virtually nothing could
be considered true if we applied such
standards across all areas of inquiry and
knowledge. The creationist's argument is
based on selectively raising standards. If
other proposed ideas were supported by
evidence to the degree that biological
evolution is, creationists would certainly
not doubt these ideas, for example, the
theory of gravity and the atomic theory.
However, the theory of evolution is fair game
for doubt, because creationists selectively
demand implausible degrees of evidence for
its truth, and won't accept anything less.
Notice how these facts could only truly be
considered criticisms of evolutionary theory
if we expected complete and total
mathematical proof for biological evolution.
The problem, of course, is that empirical
sciences do not deal with formal proofs of
absolute certainty, and must instead rely on
evidence and probability, like much of our
every day knowledge.
In normal scenarios, creationists do not have
such high standards of proof. If, for
instance, they found a half-eaten deer
carcass surrounded by wolf paw prints, the
reasonable conclusion is that the wolves ate
the deer. If subsequently they found wolves
near by, covered in deer blood, and analyzed
the vomit of one wolf and found that it
contained deer meat that would be further
evidence in support of the rather obvious
conclusion that wolves ate the deer in
question.
Now, if some wolf-loving skeptic wanted to
protect the wolves from this charge of
murder, he could adopt the creationist
strategy and utilize unreasonably high
standards of proof to shield him from
criticism. He could argue, for instance,
that because no one "observed" the wolves
eating the deer, we could doubt the
conclusion.
For this skeptic, all the evidence pointing
towards the wolves means nothing to him if we
cannot directly observe the event in
question. He could also remark that the wolf
theory leaves out certain details. For
instance, it doesn't tell us exactly how many
wolves were involved, or whether the wolves
first attacked from the right or left side,
or whether the deer happened to be looking
down at its feet when the attack occurred.
They could argue that deer are faster than
wolves so it is impossible. The skeptic could
argue that these "gaps" in the theory rule
out the wolf hypothesis.
Of course, any reasonable person can see that
the wolf skeptic sets his standards of proof
way too high. We need not directly observe
the event, nor explain every trite and inane
detail in order to know that the wolves did
indeed eat the deer. The evidence of the
eaten deer carcass, the wolf paw prints, and
blood spattered wolves, the deer meat in the
vomit, and so on, all show without a doubt
that the deer was eaten by the wolves.
Creationists use almost the exact same sorts
of arguments against evolution. When they
argue that huge biological changes resulting
from evolution have never been observed, they
do not realize that scientists need not
directly observe single-celled organisms
becoming primates in order to reasonably
conclude that such an event occurred, just as
those who believe that the wolves ate the
deer need not directly observe the event to
know that it truly happened, given the
abundance of evidence supporting the claim.
Tags : atheist atheism religion jesus church bible god faith christian satan science creationism evolution islam mormon |
|
Affichage : 54823
Durée : 488 s |
| LEA SALONGA SONGS FOR SKEPTICS |
 |
SOMETHING MORE: Songs for Skeptics is a
collection of very personal prayers. If you
let them come to you, the songs can speak to
you when your soul is restless, or when your
heart been for some reason, hardened. They
will lead you to your moments of prayer, to
seek the ONE whose heart never tires of
seeking yours. Featured in the album are Jose
Mari Chan, Ariel Rivera, Noel Cabangon, and
Ms. Lea Salonga.
Many thanks to all my subscribers who
requested for this video possible. Credit
also goes to the Michael Jackson's "Heal the
World Video" and to the Jesuits who produced
this album. Thanks:) GOD BLESS US ALL:-)
Tags : Lea Salonga |
|
Affichage : 15302
Durée : 271 s |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
| |
|
