Walter
Banned
- Joined
- Nov 19, 2008
- Messages
- 421
- Reaction score
- 83
- Gender
- Undisclosed
- Political Leaning
- Undisclosed
Its a methodological problem. YECs such as digsbe think like this:
1) Assumption: The bible is literal truth and inerrant.
2) Assumption: My sects interpretation of the Bible is unquestionable.
3) Evolution/geology contradicts #1/#2 therefore Evolution/geology is wrong.
YEC arguments center entirely around criticizing "holes" in evolutionary theory. Most of these "holes" are strawmen which have been explained over and over again. Just visit the FlatEarthSociety if you want a living proof example of something similar.
Even if evolution was wrong then YEC would still have to prove YEC theories are correct. You'll notice ZERO scientific support for YEC theories. That is exactly where it becomes obvious that YEC is not even a viable alternative. It is intellectually bankrupt. It is a position held only by irrational certainty, ignorance, and indoctrination.
Question? Just how does a truth qualify as being an assumption? A truth is demonstrable, either objectively qualified as a fact through the production of testable evidences or accepted as truth beyond reason of doubt as based upon the prima facie evidence, which lacks a counter argument based upon objective evidence that can dismiss that which is held as truth...in fact theoretical science bases its conclusions not upon Physical Science as per the yielding of Observed, Reproducible Experiments but upon the observance of today's known facts that (here comes the catch all philosophical phrase) point to a projected outcome. And believe me..there is far than enough objective evidence to give anyone with common sense a REASON to doubt, the most obvious is the falsification each and every time that Vertical Evolution is tested by the Scientific Method of the Observed, Reproducible Experimentation. Yet not one experiment can falsify CREATION as a viable explanation for the origin of man...if so, produce it.
Whether derived through facts or prima facie in nature.....TRUTH is not based upon assumption. I believe the field that you wish to engage is Philosophy not SCIENCE. You know the supposed question of the ages....WHAT IS TRUTH, What is the purpose of man...yada, yada, yada, a field that accepts the ignorance of asking a question that is ASSUMED has no answer as a sign of supposed intellect instead of pomposity, simply because you do not like the answer to the question.......Intelligent Design.
Such Pomposity even has Stephen Hawking rejecting Physical Science in a emotional need to dismiss God from the equation with his latest insane suggestion, "The Universe Spontaneously popped into existence from Nothing." Science...real science proves that if there ever was a time when nothing is all that existed, NOTHING WOULD STILL BE IN EXISTENCE TODAY as -0- + -0- = -0-
Last edited: