Thursday, January 12, 2006

Evolution Debate

The claim that life evolves or mutates from less complex to more complex forms as a result of natural processes over long periods of time cannot be supported by science and is contrary to reason.

What is the proper end of science?
Science attempts to 'know' what is unknown about the material universe. More specifically, science tends toward its proper end by way of an established methodology known as the Scientific Method. The scientist no doubt makes observations, collects evidence, makes hypotheses, and tests the proposed hypotheses. In short, science attempts to determine proximate material causes. In order to validate a scientific hypothesis, the results of the hypothesis testing at the very least must be quantifiable, repeatable, and publicly observable. Science is incapable of determining final or formal causes because its methodolgy is ill-equipped to address such matters.

Is the Theory of Evolution Considered Science?
Depends on who you ask. Pursuit of scientific knowledge about biological life is a scientific endeavor. Hypothesis testing of evolutionary theory is only science when the proper methodology is undertaken. Contemporary evolutionary proponents often avoid measurable and repeatable observations because they cannot be done. Has anyone ever observed a parrot hatch from an alligator egg? And if so, was the event repeated for peer observation? As long as evolutionary theory cannot be adequately verified by the Scientific Method, it will remain an exercise in interpretation of fossils. Advanced rock collecting, if you will.

Is Evolutionary Theory compatible with reason?
When the evolutionary process is considered in terms of its logical regression, it must be accepted that biological life evolved over the eons from simple living material that caused itself to come into being. The most common explanation for what is called 'biogenesis' seems to be that it rained on some rocks for eons until a single cell creature appeared as a result of chemical reactions in a pool of primordial rainwater. Such machinations of the mind are pure fantasy. Something cannot create itself out of nothing. In order for a being to create itself, it must pre-exist itself, which is absurd.

The absurdity of ex-nihilo (out of nothing) biogenesis is sometimes discarded by naturalists in favor of the idea that life always existed in one form or another. In other words, the history of biological life is infinite. Such a position is not logical. If yesterday was infinite, we would never get to today. Put another way, if history is infinite, we would never have gotten to the present moment. As an analogy, take an infinitely long ladder and lower it into an infinitely deep pit. Then, climb down to reach the bottom of the pit. Would you ever climb out?

What are the implications of presenting evolution as a fact in public schools?
Indoctrination of youth with false ideas(which is not education) and waste of tax revenues.