Modern Science Exposes The Theory Of Evolution As Absurd, Laughable, Blind Faith

By: Tia Johnson 0 Comments   6/8/2012

When an evolutionist conversed with a creationist, he said, "How can you rely on such blind faith?" The creationist returned, "You, friend, assert that life evolved from nothing. That's what I call blind faith."

These differing perspectives have come to a head over a new Tennessee law passed in April.

According to Marvin Olasky of WORLD magazine, the law "instructs teachers and administrators to 'create an environment within public elementary and secondary schools that encourages students to explore scientific questions, learn about scientific evidence, develop critical thinking skills, and respond appropriately and respectfully to differences of opinion about controversial issues.'"

Sounds excellent. In fact, who could argue with discovering evidence, developing critical thinking skills, and exercising respect amid differing opinions? This all sounds like what schools should be doing already.

Yet the reason this law has raised controversy is because it has taken evolution off the totem pole. Darwin's theory, according to this law, may now be questioned along with other theories of respect.

A number of groups have voiced their opposition to this great idea, including: Tennessee's ACLU and the American Association for the Advancement of Science. Scarily, these groups uphold critical thinking on all fronts except when it challenges their own ideologies.

The truth is, according to WORLD, that "more than 800 Ph.D.-bearing scientists have signed a statement expressing skepticism about contemporary evolutionary theory's claims that random mutation and natural selection account for the complexity of life. These scientists say, 'Careful examination of the evidence for Darwinian theory should be encouraged.'"

Darwinism should be placed on the dissection table in science classrooms along with other theories, including Creation, of how we came to be. I'm certain that in an honest environment, Creation would come out strong.

Ultimately, though, it's important that we give equal opportunity to these theories, especially since our view of how we began impacts all of life.

The Theory Of Evolution Is Absurd

How so? Author and speaker Nancy Pearcey spoke some on this topic during a Washington D.C. policy briefing in 2000. She revealed a book Darwinian authors came out with called "The Natural History of Rape." The authors of this book claimed that rape was a natural reaction to a male's inclination to reproduce. "In other words, if candy and flowers don't do the trick, some men may resort to coercion to fulfill the reproductive imperative," explained Pearcey.

Pearcey pointed out that the authors were simply following through with Darwin's theory: if natural selection made the human body, then it also made human behavior. In fact, if evolution were true, then we have to apply it to all of life; each part of humanity evolved.

One piece that might seem difficult for Darwinists, then, is where did our moral code come from? Humans are the only beings with a "conscience," or sense of right and wrong and remorse over wrongdoing committed (like rape). How would this have evolved from animals?

Pearcey explained: "Interestingly enough, Darwin himself wrestled with the question of truth as well--not just once, but several times. In one typical example he wrote: 'With me, the horrid doubt always arises whether the convictions of man's mind, which has been developed from the mind of the lower animals, are of any value or at all trustworthy.'

What's significant is that Darwin always expressed this 'horrid doubt' in the context of admitting that he couldn’t quite shake an 'inward conviction' that the universe cannot be the result of chance after all, but requires an intelligent Mind, a First cause. In other words, he applied his skepticism selectively: When his mind led to a theistic conclusion, he argued that after all the human mind cannot give us any real truth. But since his own theory was also a product of the human mind, he was cutting off the branch he himself was sitting on."

Darwin, in line with his theory, actually claims that religion is also a product of evolution. According to Pearcey, Darwin claims that once the mind has developed to a certain point, we make up an idea about god as part of our survival. And, since the mind cannot contrive truth, according to Darwin, religion and ideas about god must be erroneous.

This isn't the only flashing red light about Darwin's views, though. It's also apparent that Darwinism influences our daily choices. Pearcey quotes an article by Arthur Leff of the Yale Law School: "And if there is no God, Leff argues, then nothing and no one can take His place. Nothing else can function as the grounding of morality--no person, no group, no document--because all of these can be challenged... and yet [Leff] ends his piece by saying, 'Napalming babies is [still] bad. Starving the poor is wicked. Buying and selling each other is depraved. This is such a thing as evil.'"

Evil Reveals That Darwinism Is A Religion

This is where it is obvious that Darwinism is a religion and contradicts the Bible entirely. One cannot thoroughly believe both at the same time.

Pearcey goes on, "Americans want to feel that we are free to choose our own values, that no one can tell us what to do. And yet, at the same time, we want to be able to say that certain things are genuinely wrong, objectively evil.

Harvard professor Michael Sandel, in Democracy’s Discontent, says the major political divide in America today lies precisely here--between those who believe that morality is indeed up for grabs, something we construct for ourselves and, on the other hand, those who believe morality is 'given' in some way--grounded in divine relevation or human nature or in some other objective manner."

Obviously, the consequences of this debate are deep. One's view of how life began is more than just the nuts and bolts of science. This perspective also determines one's view of right and wrong.

On its face, Tennessee's law shouldn't yield such an outcry. Schools should provide an environment of learning and discovery, should they not? What the law asks is for schools to approach theories academically, as a school should- looking at its loopholes along with its pieces of evidence. This is learning.

Such may be why groups like the Discovery Institute encouraged the new Tennessee law. Their goal isn't to erase evolution from textbooks, but to cover it more fully, presenting it as a theory with pros and cons. They said, according to World, "Evolution should be taught as a scientific theory that is open to critical scrutiny, not as a sacred dogma that can't be questioned."

Yet as Pearcey points out, there's another reason to further investigate Darwinism: at its roots, it's a religion which shapes our worldview, and this worldview may set up individuals and society for disaster.

Here is a video of what Modern Science has revealed.

DelightMedia.com


Current Catalog

Reader Comments

Be the first to leave a comment!
Write a Comment

Please keep comments civil and on-topic. Abusive or inappropriate comments will be removed without warning.

 Name (required)   
 Email Address (required)   
 Website URL 
Comment  
The Case for a Creator: A Journalist Investigates Scientific Evidence That Points Toward God

Former journalist and skeptic Lee Strobel has discovered something very interesting about science. Far from being the enemy of faith, science may now provide a solid foundation for believing in God. Has science finally discovered God? Certainly new discoveries in such scientific disciplines as cosmology, cellular biology, astronomy, physics and DNA research are pointing to the incredible complexity of our universe, a complexity best explained by the existence of a Creator.

The Long War Against God: The History and Impact of the Creation/Evolution Conflict

This book shows how evolution cannot stand up to reasoning, because it was created to provide an alternative theory to life in which to support the religion of secular humanism, which men have created to reject God. Secular humanism and atheism provide a shallow and unstable resting place for the soul of man that refuses to reconcile with God. They provide an identity to build one’s life upon apart from the God. But even if you find comfort in this collective identity, you are empty because the conclusion is that life has no value and no purpose. The only place man can find true hope and true rest is when he finds the truth.

Evidence for God: 50 Arguments for Faith from the Bible, History, Philosophy, and Science

In Evidence for God, leading Christian scholars and apologists provide compelling arguments that address the latest and most pressing questions about God, science, Jesus, the Bible, and more, including: -Did Jesus really exist? -Is Jesus really the only way to God? -What about those who have never heard the gospel? -Is today's Bible what was originally written? -What about recently publicized gospels that aren't in the Bible? -Is intelligent design really a credible explanation of the origins of our world? This book shows that is it more intelligent to believe in God then not to.

The Devil’s Delusion: Atheism and its Scientific Pretensions

In this book, David Berlinski addresses the “stray man” arguments from the "new atheism" in a delightful writing style by showing that for no other reason than for how pompous writers like Richard Dawkins, Daniel Dennett, and Christopher Hitchins have tried to use science to support their claims. Berlinksi makes it clear that he in no way means to disparage or belittle Science. He is only trying to show how Science has been twisted by The Four Horsemen in an attempt to prove an anti-religious point of view, and how that twisting promises so much and delivers so little.