While researching the origin of sexuality, I came across this great site ( www.trueorigin.org ) that deals with the undeniable bias that Naturalists give when interpreting scientific evidence.
Contrary to the unilateral denials of many evolutionists, one’s worldview does indeed play heavily on one’s interpretation of scientific data, a phenomenon that is magnified in matters concerning origins, where neither repeatability, nor observation, nor measurement—the three immutable elements of the scientific method—may be employed.
I appreciate finding sites like this. It serves as a reminder that nobody is truly objective. And even though the grill of the social-scientific bulldozer is intimidating at times, there is still true reasoning out there for those who are looking. Search for truth, not PC snake-oil.
The evolution of sex (and its accompanying reproductive capability) is not a favorite topic of discussion in most evolutionary circles, because no matter how many theories evolutionists conjure up (and there are several), they still must surmount the enormous hurdle of explaining the origin of the first fully functional female and the first fully functional male necessary to begin the process.
My first emotional response was “You stupid jerk. Why do you think you can go around insulting people without regard to their religious beliefs… blah, blah, blah – calling religious people dark age thinkers, etc.” I find myself losing patience with these types of people, but I’m working on it. (As a disclaimer though, this comment is one of the tamest and non-threatening I’ve read in a while. Usually atheists are highly rude, violent speaking, and obnoxious.)
After regaining my head, I decided to think deeper into the rationale behind that statement. “Remind me again what century we’re living in…” This is essentially a euphemism for a larger concept:
Modern science has proven all religion is false.
Of course, any thinking person could tell you this is not at all true, even by a stretch. But then again, when is the logic of the social mainstream ever actually right. The truth is, science is consistently proving only one thing… that previous science has been completely wrong and inadequate. Each new discovery makes previous “science” obsolete.
No, science hasn’t proven religion false. The scientific community has simply declared that anything outside the realm of approved scientific philosophy (Naturalism) is to be shunned and ridiculed. A naive and biased stance to take.
My claim that “Science will eventually prove that God exists” is equally as valid (and just as likely) as the Naturalist smug claims that “Science will eventually prove that evolution is fact”. Plus one of those two statements gives hope and purpose to life. The other, pointlessness and hopelessness. I choose hope and life.