Posted by
Patrick on Tuesday, February 24, 2009 5:30:10 PM
Evolution: Theoretic Opium
- by Patrick. J.Z.
Graphic: Institute for Creation Science Copyright 2009
Of
all genesis theories proposed by either science or religion, evolution is the greatest stick and carrot chasing one of them all. This particular theory
belongs in its’ own class of Greek mythology: How planet earth is being held up by Atlas - or Darwin. Advocates of biblical creation constantly hear the cries of “strawman arguments! religious extremism! biblical mythology!" bellowing out against them from angry halls of secular elitism.
However, where as mythology (of any flavoring) is merely the product an overactive
imagination in order to explain natural and metaphysical
phenomenon (not too unlike the vivid imagination of evolutionists and
their arbitrary portrayal of prehistoric periods), scripture,
ironically, with all of it's fantastic supernatural accounts is
validated by archaeology, textual criticism, prophetic fulfillment,
social experience, scholars of other religions in addition to Jewish
and Christian apologists, has a general consensus of acceptance by
many influential persons throughout history, and has been given to man - by a Creator - for the purpose of light, guidance, freedom, and understanding the overall basics of origins.
So, in all candor, as creationists we must confess: our adherence to a creation principle when addressing 'origins' is predominately, and gladly, the solid foundation of faith in a sound biblical revelation, rather than in creative theories masking as scientific facts.
If the scientific adage is true: pure scientific conclusions must be proven by actual facts and facts alone. Then
everyone is still waiting for this saying to become an actual
scientific verity in regard to evolution. Instead, all we get from our
secular science community is nothing short of a brainwashing mantra which continually sells
evolution as a ‘highly probable fact,’ when at best it should be cautioned as nothing more than a proverbial Grecian myth - capricious, speculative, and imaginative.
A myth which is being propped up and perpetuated by a greater number of
anti-God, anti-scripture, philosophers and philosophies, rather than a
sufficient number of intellectually honest scientists. Scholars which
in fact do honestly apply the above adage are the ones who usually
abandon preconceived evolutionism premises as having any
credible explanation for origins. In the wake of new research,
especially in micro-biology, this cross-over from
evolution into any kind of creationism is becoming epidemic.
“The
popular media often portrays the creation vs. evolution debate as
science vs. religion, with creation being religious and evolution being
scientific. In an ironic twist, it's the creationists who have a solid
empirical basis for their theory, while the evolutionists are left
clinging to their convictions by faith.” - All About Creation contributors.
Even the father of evolution and natural selection had his misgivings on the theory:
"To
suppose that the eye with all its inimitable contrivances for adjusting
the focus to different distances, for admitting different amounts of
light, and for the correction of spherical and chromatic aberration,
could have been formed by natural selection, seems, I freely confess,
absurd in the highest degree.” - Charles Darwin
We
are inclined to conclude then, that many who continue to embrace the
theory of evolution in the face of mounting non-supportive scientific
findings are actually grasping at their own delusional faith in
something else. Evolutionism began as a smug 19th century elitist
repudiation of the literal Genesis account, but has gradually morphed
into a 21st century's desperate and malicious all out, anti-scripture
campaign. A world view whose main goal today is to discount a Creator,
a Savior, and the bible altogether. It has become an intolerance that
is quick to shout down anyone who disagrees, a pseudo-scientific
opium for unbelief.
Modern day philosophies exalting evolution, furthermore, serve only to fuel the arrogance of man, i.e., man is not responsible to any God; mankind has evolved and can make his own moral rules! - the
ever deforming evolution of the theory of evolution.
How tragic that
those who stubbornly reject the light of scriptural revelation and
prefer the darkness of irresponsible science believe they have the
light, when in actuality they are in the dark. “If then the light in you is darkness, how great is the darkness?” - Jesus
*Theistic
evolutionists are not quite in the same category because their motives
and goals differ from atheistic evolutionists. But they are in fact, without
realizing it, chasing after the same carrot, the same vacuous,
scientifically unsupported, theories.
The Incredible Spheres!
Abiotic
(non living) systems are separate entities from biospheric (living)
species. The biosphere cannot survive without them. In order for life
to exist and continue on planet earth, these abiotic-systems must work
in absolute perfect and delicate sequence with each other and the
biosphere, even though they are completely independent of that
biosphere and each other.
“The
naturalistic philosophy of modern science has created a dilemma for
evolution. No known laws of nature allow complex, living,
information-containing systems to develop from the random interactions
of matter. Yet, this is what is required in order for life to have
evolved in the universe.” - Roger Patterson: Evolution exposed
This
statement has to do with the impossibility of inert matter somehow
processing itself in just the right way, over a long span of time, in
order for specialized microbes to come into being and then evolve. No
laws of nature support this possibility - not one. And if that
scientific principle is true of chemical reactions and inert matter
pertaining to complex bio-cultures, how much more so with complex
abiotic systems, i.e., how does inert, unintelligent matter, form
itself into abiotic-complex systems?
“From
setting orbits straight and creating moons, to manufacturing magnetic
fields, secular science has consistently used chance cosmic collisions
and near-misses to explain the origins of a host of fine-tuned
attributes. This strong reliance on lucky coincidences reveals a bias
toward “methodological naturalism.” - Brain Thompson M.S. ‘ Can Cosmic Collisions Create?' Institute for Creation Science
Earth’s hydrosphere, atmosphere, and geo-sphere,
are three abiotic- systems that operate in delicate balance and
precision with each other and the biosphere. There is no evidence that
these spheres came into being either of their own accord, or
accidentally, and then started interacting with each other
mechanically, chemically, and electrically, in order to maintain this
delicate balance. Yet, they have come into being, and they do maintain
a delicate balance in the earth. We must accept that something greater has made it
so. But what? Of course the evolutionist will nonchalantly respond with, Random Chance. But is that really any non-scientifically different than a creationist saying, “God.”
Random Chance is not exactly a series of scientific principles
supporting conclusive scientific facts. So Random Chance is nothing
more than a ‘belief’
based on nothing. For those who reject a Creator, but will not throw in
with the empty philosophy of Random Chance, the only possibility would
be that another force with a kind of artificial intelligence has made
it so. But what? That in itself is a ‘belief’ based on rejecting God and Random Chance. It’s almost as if that group is saying, “We don’t exactly know what is, but we ‘believe’ it is there, and some day we will find it.” But even if some ‘thing’ is found with supportive scientific fact; a ‘thing’ that has arranged the precise workings of the abiotic-systems, who is then to say that God did not create that ‘thing,’ what ere it may be? For if not God, then some other ‘thing’ would have had to put together that entity that put together the abiotic-systems. Would that at last be God? Or some other ‘thing’? Die hard unbelievers and evolutionists will pursue that 'other thing,' creationists choose to trust in Scripture and God.
A little overview of these spheres will help us to appreciate the complexity and precision of earth’s abiotic support systems:
The hydrosphere,
or water sphere, is the essence of life on earth. Every simple cell and
living organism needs water in some measure or degree. But the
hydrosphere does not merely provide water to the biosphere, it provides
it in measured and gentle ways. One of those ways is through the
process of evaporation, condensation, and precipitation - rain. Without
this process, which works in perfect harmony with the atmosphere, plant
life would not exist anywhere except near a body of fresh water or
spring.
The hydrosphere does more than merely provide moisture.
Water circulation, by the process of rain, through underground streams,
above ground creeks, rivers, and ocean currents, regulates atmospheric
conditions. Atmospheric conditions regulate temperature and humidity
distribution on land, sea ,and air. Without a constant circulation of
water in precise flow patterns, the earth would either die or be very
uncomfortable. Hydrosphere circulation, as with all spheres and their
unique operations, is also aided and abetted by other planetary
mechanics.
Earth’s atmosphere not
only provides a balance of oxygen, nitrogen, and other gas elements for
oxygen breathing creatures, it also receives and disburses sunlight in
delicate ways that are sensitive and refined to the eye of man and
other creatures. It accomplishes all of this as it simultaneously works
in conjunction with the hydrosphere’s crucial moisture distributing
activities.
Geosphere:
dirt, rock, and all solids. Earth, or dirt, has got to be one of the
rare wonders of the world. Its’ makeup is such that it not only
provides land creatures with a stable platform on which to live and
move, and plant life to take root and grow, but it also has to be
porous with a perfect consistency of compaction, so as to absorb
moisture, filter water, and at the same time be cohesive enough to
contain the liquid. It cannot be all porous or all solid. It has to be
just right.
How Wonderful!
that abiotic systems, such as these, must have conspired together in
order to aid and abet in the beginnings of life, and then maintain its'
survival.
The hydrosphere said to the geosphere,
“I need you to fit these specifications and scales, so that I may
properly circulate,” and the geosphere said, “I can do that, just make
sure you coordinate your activities with the atmosphere so as to meet
my specs. And get brother sun and sister moon to fine tune their
operations with our systems. We won’t be able to do anything without
them. And don’t forget to inform the magnetosphere, gravitational mass ratio, and
the constant of planetary motion. We can do this and make life happen
if we all pull together. When we do, these chemical elements floating
around can form into complex amino acids and microbes over billions of
years and then evolve into higher life forms. Certainly we will also
need to adapt and change our complex mechanics as these life forms
mutate and evolve so as to continue servicing their intricate
biological needs. Whew, we have our work cut out for us.”
If you don’t accept this scenario, there’s always the scientific vacuity of: a series of random chance incidents, better known in the scientific community as Methodological Naturalism, i.e., everything just sort of happens naturally (i.e. accidentally). Or you could chase the stick and carrot of ‘something else is out there.’ and spend all your life trying to find it. And of course there is still the possibility of creation; creation by a highly intelligent and powerful Creator as depicted in the book of Genesis.
Mankind
(in general) is currently in the dilemma of faith vs. science; a very
unproductive anomaly. This was never meant to be. He must find how the
two fit together without falling into the snare of pseudo-science and
the temptation of colorful, but unsupported, theories. That’s just the
way it is, and the way it has been set up by the Creator's wisdom.
Without the Creator’s input and inclusion, without the Creator's
revelation and light, scientific mankind is nothing more than a funny
dog, chasing his own short stubby tale (sic).
“For by Him all things were created that are in heaven and that are on earth.” Colossians 1:16
***
Bibliography: On the Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection,
or the Preservation of Favored Races in the Struggle for Life: Charles
Darwin; Institute of Creation Science: Eclectic; Evolution Exposed:
Roger Patterson; All about Creation Web Site: General Information; Can
Cosmic Collisions Create?: Brian Thompson; High School Earth Science
Review: Michael Bentley; New King James Bible; http://www.icr.org/article/can-cosmic-collisions-create
Unsearchable Wonders is being edited and is not available at this time.
http://www.allaboutcreation.org/creation-vs-evolution-n.htm
http://emporium.turnpike.net/C/cs/top.htm
More quotes and sentiments on the theory of Evolution:
"I believe that one day the Darwinian myth will be ranked the greatest deceit in the history of science." - Soren Lovtrup
"The
doctrine of evolution has swept the world, not on the strength of its
scientific merits, but precisely in its capacity as a Gnostic myth. It
affirms, in effect, that living beings created themselves, which is, in
essence, a metaphysical claim.... Thus, in the final analysis,
evolutionism is in truth a metaphysical doctrine decked out in
scientific garb." - Smith, Wolfgang, Teilhardism and the New Religion: Tan Books and Publishers, 1988, Rockford, Illinois, p. 24
“Lynn
Margulis says that history will ultimately judge neo-Darwinism as "a
minor twentieth-century religious sect within the sprawling religious
persuasion of Anglo-Saxon biology." -
Michael Behe Darwin's Black Box (1996), page 26 Reference given is to:
Science Vol. 252, 19 April 1991, pp. 379-381 Which references: American
Zoologist, 30:861-875 (1990)
"Today
our duty is to destroy the myth of evolution, considered as a simple,
understood, and explained phenomenon which keeps rapidly unfolding
before us. Biologists must be encouraged to think about the weaknesses
and extrapolations that theoreticians put forward or lay down as
established truths.” - Grasse, Pierre-Paul (1977): Evolution of Living Organisms