Oct 21

Sex and the Evolutionary Bias

Darwin QuoteWhile 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.

Regarding Sexuality:

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.


More here…

Jul 27

Evolution – The Suppression of Ideas

Comments I’ve seen recently in online forums against creation and Intelligent Design

  • Creationists have the same amount of intellectual integrity as Holocaust deniers.
  • (sarcastic) “I read stuff on creationist websites, therefore I am smarter than every scientist who has been working for years in the field”
  • …creationists aren’t just deluded, they’re desperate.
  • They think everything is a religion because they do not know what science is.
  • Religion sucks.
  • Church is a waist of time
  • You’re an idiot.

I have a brief response (by me) directed specifically to the first statement above.

Be careful, such statements like this expose you to ridicule for extremism and irrationality. There are many highly intelligent creationists in this world, and because your statement is then obviously false, it discredits your testimony on this subject completely.

Besides, true science requires us to continually examine all possible explanations. Assuming creationism is completely unscientific is to intentionally suppress a viewpoint that could potentially hold some truth otherwise overlooked by other theories.

Better to error on the side of hearing all the evidence, than to suppress viewpoints for some philosophical advantage. Exchange of ideas is a general good, even if you don’t agree with the ideas being proposed.


Another Great Response

This is taken from a user on Yahoo Answers… goes by the handle “Lightning From the east”. I thought it was outstanding, so I copied it here.

Lying for Darwin is STILL Lying, accept it and get over it, Everyone with half a brain knows.(Get this in YOIR HEAD) The evidence for evolution is and has been interpreted from a Philosophical and ideological Bias, The answers given by adherents to Evolution here in R&S is proof of the bias and agenda, Atheism has to have an alternate explanation—other than a Creator—for how the universe and life came into existence.

Darwin once identified himself as a Christian but as a result of some tragedies that took place in his life, he later renounced the Christian faith and the existence of God. Evolution was invented by an atheist…
…Those Christians who believe in evolution have no idea how that effects their theology.
What is theistic evolution?
Eternity is a Long Time to be wrong about this

The Case for a Creator

What Hath Darwin Wrought?

Darwin’s Deadly Legacy (1 of 7)

Creation In The 21st Century – Planet Earth Is Special 1 of 3

Creation In The 21st Century – Lets Talk to An Evolutionist About Creation 1 of 3

Creation in the 21st Century – Overwhelming Evidence 1 of 3

The Privileged Planet

More than 600 Scientist with PHD’s who have Signed A SCIENTIFIC DISSENT FROM DARWINISM
“We are skeptical of claims for the ability of random mutation and natural selection to account for the complexity of life.
Careful examination of the evidence for Darwinian theory should be encouraged.”