Re: The Evolutionist Pseudoscientific Method

Cornithian -- you BELIEVE in Evolution.

It's a BELIEF. Not FACT. BELIEF.

For example, you BELIEVE that some miracle happened billions of years ago which created the first cell, and all subsequent cells on this planet are descendants from that cell (or, perhaps, the multitude of other spontaneously formed cells at whatever time conditions were right for the spontaneous creation of cells from non-living matter, and all living matter is, therefore, descended from those initial cells).

All of modern evolutionary theory depends on this miracle.

You believe it happened.

Science has yet to show that such is possible, much less prove that it did.

But this obvious lack of evidence does not in any way prevent you from assuming that it did occur, with as much belief as a Christian has in Frankenstein God making his pet Adam in Eden -- in other words, no evidence except that somebody said so.

You claim that evolution is the only possible explanation based on the evidence, and yet I see the same evidence [note: I'm not a Christian, Jew, or Muslim] and I find that it not only fails to confirm evolution but also wildly contradicts it.

And when pressed, you engage in ad hominem attacks or speak in terms of generalities or appeals to authority. And then, to top it off, you insist you aren't doing these things and then in the next paragraph or post go right on doing them!

Look at your last post -- the one I'm replying to.

The summary of your first paragraph: "Religion depends on emotion, Science demands reason." And yet you aren't being very rational at all. You're insisting that just because someone is a creationist, that he necessarily cannot be employing the scientific method when he discusses scientific subjects with which he disagrees. No matter how much you try to cloak your argument in a "Science vs. Religion" framework, that's really all you're saying. "It's not possible to use Science to counter Evolution, because Evolution is Science." It's circular reasoning.

Your second paragraph: "Science does not argue from authority." Ummm... yeah. Actually, it does. Well, not real science, but Evolution certainly does. To you, the fact that it's "Scientific" makes it the authority, and you reject anything which doesn't match what "Science" has already decreed is true.

Your third paragraph is the pinnacle of hypocrisy when applied to evolution. No matter what evidence comes up, Evolution is the already-known, already-"proven", no-possible-other-explanation answer.

Regarding your fourth paragraph, Evolution most certainly does claim to have the ultimate answer about the behavior of life and its origin. Life evolved from that primordial ooze... That magical moment when one more of the original cells that ultimately spawned all life as we know it just happened to coallesce from the ingredients floating around in the ocean... There's your God moment. Your "creationism". The difference is, your "God" is "Random Chance".

And your sixth paragraph starts out with yet another bit of circular reasoning. Since I challenge evolution, I'm clearly scientifically deficient (i.e. too stupid to bother debating). Then you devolve into an attack on creationists, again claiming that their only source information is the Bible, because none of the evidence they offer could possibly be valid or scientific -- more ad hominem, more circular reasoning.

Evolution does not, by the way, explain "all the evidence we have gathered, across all scientific displines, from every corner of the planet, from the beguinning of life to the present" -- your statement is only true as long as you ignore all the evidence that "we" have gathered that was rejected or ignored because it didn't fit evolution.

And your final paragraph is, again, just another ad hominem attack against creationists. "No creationist has ever used Science against evolution." Why not just cover your ears and eyes and yell "LA LA LA LA LA!" a few billion times while you're at it? "They are very good at using pseudo-science and fooling the poorly informed, but their arguments always fail." How would you know? As soon as one is offered, you cry "pseudo-science" and ignore it.

There's a lot of good science out there, Corinthian, and there's a lot of garbage. Evolution as a theory is a belief system that depends on a lot of real science to attempt to validate it, but those scientific disciplines are not evolution, and they do not prove evolution.

Show me a cell happening from non-living matter for starters. Being such simple creatures, that should be an easy one, shouldn't it? And yet we can't do it. We can put all the elements we think would be necessary in a bowl, and yet they don't just spontaneously form into the cell wall, the nucleus, and all the various organelles, do they? And we don't know what it would take to kick-start the operation, do we?

Yet this is what you believe happened, in spite of an absolute lack of evidence that this occurred.

Belief.

Religion.

And there you are, smack dab in the middle of it, screaming that it's not religion and it's not belief, that it's facts and truth and "science".

Hypocrisy... it's not just for Pharisees.