Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 69 (9101 total)
4 online now:
Newest Member: sensei
Upcoming Birthdays: AlexCaledin
Post Volume: Total: 904,092 Year: 973/14,231 Month: 973/1,514 Week: 6/234 Day: 6/36 Hour: 0/1


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Another anti-evolution bill, Missouri 2012
PaulGL
Member (Idle past 2873 days)
Posts: 92
Joined: 04-06-2012


Message 273 of 283 (658566)
04-06-2012 11:08 AM
Reply to: Message 1 by Trixie
01-13-2012 4:42 AM


I am perturbed, flabbergasted, and disturbed by the continuing efforts of misguided (to the point even of committing perjury in ‘Dover, et. al.’) and scripturally incorrect religious people to foist their misconceptions, under the guise of ‘scientific theories’ (creationism, intelligent design, etc.) upon the educational system. In addition to the obvious damage and hindrance to our educational curricula, these attempts are a huge misrepresentation of spiritual reality
Evolution as a scientific discipline must be divorced from the associated parent philosophy Uniformitarianism which was in vogue preceding it for reasons which have been discredited since. Evolution is a valid scientific discipline, Uniformitarianism is a disproven philosophy and school of thought. Uniformitarianism has intruded and embedded itself into scientific thought and thus skewed many considerations of cosmology and astral physics from being objective and empirical. Never mind poor old Emmanuel Velikovsky: While the evidence that he was considering was and is relevant and valid, his derivations (due to his great lack in correct scientific methodology) and conclusions were far amiss. He thus did a great disservice to the school of astral catastrophism, and set back its credibility immensely.
The most recent conclusive disproof of Uniformitarianism is this(Coverage to the public was broadcast on a segment of Nova in the last 12 months):
1. In the past decade (survey completion in last 3-4 years) a radar/topological mapping satellite of improved precision surveyed the surface of Venus.
2. Recently formed (even of possibly historical times), non-eroded craters were found in large and significant quantities on the surface of Venus, craters which were not the result of volcanic activity, but of astral catastrophism (meteoric impact).
3. When a renowned (I didn’t take note of his name, due to the following) uniformitarian astrophysicist was interviewed for his opinion he said: Well, I don’t see how Uniformitarianism can ever possibly explain these craters. But, nevertheless, I’m not willing to give it up.
4. Gentlemen, this is not objective, logical, scientific methodology. Scientific methodology requires that when the derived conclusions of your theory are found to be false in light of the evidence, then you either discard the theory or, if possible modify the flawed part of it accordingly. To cling to it after it has been disproved is not objective, it is religious domaticism.
Creationism per se in all of its multi-farious manifestations, since it invokes to some extent and at some point a supernatural genesis of species, is thus by its very nature incapable of being a scientific discipline. That being the case, creationism has absolutely no place whatsoever in any scientific textbook.
Paul
amessageforthehumanrace
Edited by Adminnemooseus, : Add more blank lines between paragraphs.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by Trixie, posted 01-13-2012 4:42 AM Trixie has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 274 by jar, posted 04-06-2012 11:23 AM PaulGL has not replied
 Message 275 by AdminModulous, posted 04-06-2012 11:28 AM PaulGL has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2022 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.1
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2023