Letters to the Editor
-
As Woody Allen said,
You can't prove the non-existence of gaw-wud, you just have to take it on faith.
A question for IDers. What created the creator?
Is everyone familiar with the concept known as "Occam's Razor?" aka known as "Ockham's Razor." It's premise is that the simpler hypothesis is more likely to be true. Evolution does not rule out the existence of a devine creator, it just doesn't need one. Why add to unnecessary frill to a valid concept?
Does everyone here accept the germ theory, or that illness is caused by sin.
Do you believe that every time someone unwraps a condom, an angel dies?
Do you believe in the "flying spaghetti monster?"
-
Orthodoxy revealed
Quotes below from LW "Little Johnny Jewel":
An orthodoxy is a fixed set of beliefs that ties its veracity to its immutability.
Followed by
Evolution is a fact, unless you are crazy.
My emphasis added to note the conversion of theory to fact; a good example of Orthodoxy.
But the point of an orthodox belief is that it's supposed be true, eternal, and not up for debate.
Followed by
You can't argue with millions of tons of geologic evidence and the utter lack of any - any - fossil evidence negating it.
I thought a theory required the ability to be falsified. There is no way, in your orthodoxy, to argue anything. I could be mistaken. Please describe a scenario that falsifies evolutionary theory (any part of it). NOT one that proves creationism because it also cannot be falsified.
Science is the opposite: it encourages heresy; no, it demands it. When it seems to be intransigent it is simply asking you to prove your claims.
Science may demand heresy, but advocates of theories, good or bad, almost universally attempt to stifle debate and supress differing viewpoints.
But where is pure science in this debate? Politicised science is orthodoxy or, often, corporate-sponsored deceit. Let us not forget that most science is not conducted for the benefit of any but a few and is subjugated to other concerns.
Here is a falsifiable theory: A high probability exists that a proponent of Theory A will use ad hominem attacks, lies, deceit and subterfuge to undermine a proponent of Theory B if Theory A conflicts with Theory B and said proponent has a vested interest in its maintenance.
I assert that Creationism is a non-falisifiable theory with very little, if any, evidence, to support it.
I assert that Evolution is a non-falisifiable theory with very little evidence to support it.
The "fossil record" you mention is fragmentary, an exceptionally small if not statistically insignificant sample of its measured population, sometimes laced with fraud and often rife with wild speculation based on the merest shard of "evidence".
I would not take a single dose of a medicine founded on an equally statistically small sampling of data. Continued exploration is necessary, but the fossil record is not able to produce conclusive, primary evidence as you assert and as orthodoxy demands that we believe.
While I hold even less credulity for creationism under any name, the current theories are not, as you claim, fact. Better to be silent than to attack others for their beliefs when our own are based on such a tiny, tiny amount of evidence.
Imagine, gathering 2 tons of bones in a room and attempting to diagnose the illness of every person in a single hospital. Accuracy is unlikely, I would say.
ID is not a competing theory; it's not even honest speculation. It is political sophistry designed simply to obscure the debate.
No. This is a simple ad hominem attack on its proponents. Who are you to name their motives? Why would you assume that they are insincere? It is a religious belief. You use similar logic to argue for your point of view as creationism uses for its own. Essentially, you are saying "Because that is what I learned." 21st century texts will one day be as old as bronze age scrolls. Science in Orthodoxy will not admit its ignorance.
Finally, my post was not intended to question evolution, a good theory with reasons that justify its continued exploration (IMHO). My post was intended to point out the ridiculous self-righteousness of those who formulate deductive theory and present it as prima facia fact.
-
Here's more totally unbiased recommendation of C. David Parsons's monumental study
Posted at The Atlantic.com
(http://rossdouthat.theatlantic.com/archives/2007/06/science_has_spoken_the_case_is.php)
"Just when it appeared that God may have delayed his response to evolutionists, enter THE QUEST FOR RIGHT, a masterful work on creationism.
The great gulf of ambiguity that once separated Intelligent Design from legitimate scientific discourse has been abolished. It is a fact: The Quest for Right has accomplished that which, heretofore, was deemed impossible: to level the playing field between forces advocating creationism and those promoting evolution.
The Lord has heard the cries of His people and responded with a scientific resource on creationism that will stop these onslaughts against Christianity. The Quest for Right turns the tide by providing an authoritative and enlightening scientific explanation of natural phenomena that will ultimately replace the Darwinian view.
For example, the investigation dismantles the hocus pocus responsible for the various absolute radioisometric dating techniques by which rocks and other materials are supposedly dated. Absolute-"perfect, complete, definite; without a prospect of being incorrect." On these incalculable formulae— and they are incalculable—rest the science council's claim that the earth is of great age, accreting some 4.6 billion years B.C. Upon publication of The Quest for Right, the council's choice of the superlative absolute will be assessed to be a scurrilous invective, an "abusive, offensive, even vulgar, connotation." After all, who would question an absolute? It is a matter of record that these dating systems are the tools by which evolutionists have attempted to rip apart the validity of historical documentations, specifically, that the account of creation as recorded in the Bible is mythology. The Quest for Right has changed all of that: the scientific record of creation has stood undaunted against these attacks and has proven to be an invaluable asset to the in-depth investigation.
The first three volumes of the seven volume set will be published early fall '07. The Quest for Right is all new from the get-go and is destined to make headlines that will reverberate within the halls of academia throughout the world. Coming soon to bookstores and online merchants such as Amazon.com, Barnes and Nobel.com, Walmart.com and questforright.com. Author, C. David Parsons, biblical scholar and scientist extraordinare.
Posted by Linda Parsons | June 8, 2007 10:32 AM"