Friday, February 22, 2013

Different theological claims and mythologies... imagine that! There's nothing wrong with imagining things. Although there is something wrong with passing off your imagination as the epistemic equivalent of an empirical or experimental science.

Even a Buddhist and Baptist can share common beliefs, and while evolutionists come from all religious backgrounds and beliefs, those differences are all irrelevant. What matters is their shared religious beliefs that mandate evolution. They can argue all they want about peripheral matters, but they share the same core commitments.

Consider, for example, Coyne’s rhetorical statement that biogeography refutes creation:

If animals were specially created, why would the creator produce on different continents fundamentally different animals that nevertheless look and act so much alike?

Or consider Coyne’s metaphysical claims about how organisms would be designed and why this proves evolution:

What I mean by "bad design" is the notion that if organisms were built from scratch by a designer—one who used the biological building blocks of nerves, muscles, bone, and so on—they would not have such imperfections. Perfect design would truly be the sign of a skilled and intelligent designer. Imperfect design is the mark of evolution. ... the particular bad designs that we see make sense only if they evolved

Or again, consider how Coyne’s religious convictions leads him to the certain conclusion that only evolution can explain the appearance of species through time because that pattern is “far from random” and “no theory of special creation, or any theory other than evolution, can explain these patterns.

Coyne’s goes on and on with his religious proofs in his book Why Evolution is True and in his presentations. Biology, Coyne repeats over and over, “makes no sense under the idea of special creation.

These are religious claims not scientific claims. 
Read more at: Darwin's God 

 Problem... is Darwin's god that would apparently never allow deception or pranks in the world or the twisting and turning of evil itself... your god?  Their whole way of imagining things about the past collapses if you don't agree with their theological claims.  Darwin may have been a great theologian... but not really much of a great scientist, unless you think that merely projecting some economic theories onto nature (which have been falsified according to experimental and historical evidence) and engaging in theological claims is the equivalent of experimental and empirical evidence.  

No comments: