Tuesday, February 21, 2012

Evolution Fact or best guess? Does Theory mean fact or does it mean best hypothesis to derive a result?

First off like any stubborn atheist we'll define some terms

  1. The process by which different kinds of living organisms are thought to have developed and diversified from earlier forms during the...
  2. A gradual process in which something changes into a different and usually more complex or better form
  3. Change in the genetic composition of a population during successive generations, as a result of natural selection acting on the genetic variation among individuals, and resulting in the development of new species.
  4. Genetic Descent with modification


  1. A thing that is indisputably the case.
  2. Information used as evidence or as part of a report or news article
  3. something that actually exists; reality; truth: Your fears have no basis in fact.
  4. something known to exist or to have happened: Space travel is now a fact.
  5. a truth known by actual experience or observation; something known to be true: Scientists gather facts about plant growth.


a coherent group of tested general propositions, commonly regarded as correct, that can be used as principles of explanation and prediction for a class of phenomena: Einstein's theory of relativity. principle, law, doctrine.
a proposed explanation whose status is still conjectural and subject to experimentation, in contrast to well-established propositions that are regarded as reporting matters of actual fact. idea, notion hypothesis, postulate. practice, verification, corroboration, substantiation.

With these definitions we get that Evolution is a FACT only because we have nothing else to go with. But when truth comes into view as a 100% knowledge of a subject, then anything that is less is not truth. Only believed and likely to be truth. Though when we're in grades 1-12 we're taught Truth is always a statement or result of fact(s). Mind you when it comes to Scientific Theories such as evolution we throw common sense of this manner out the window and go with deduction and induction confirmations to support our projects or challenges.
When I define a Scientific theory as a group of hypothesis's confirmed by evidence solidly giving likely results rather than concrete answers I get people saying that's right. But say it as though it's an educated guess with promising results and you get people turning into monsters as though you hurt their dog. Though they don't see that when they take a theory of something and confirm their hypothesis by focusing on select data and call it fact this is misleading to those who don't have the drive to look up the data that was thrown away and just ignored.

When in a conversation with some Evolution believing/knowing atheists it is a fact because it can't or hasn't been shown to be likely dis-proven. Now I don't blame them for not having an open mind, I blame the academic world for being closed to anything but the secular explanation as it sits through mans views on nature. Although it is trying at times when they say that all science is rooted in evolution, especially Biology. Now it's true that someone studying to be a surgeon needs to know of evolution but this does not serve any purpose behind the anatomy and how to do the surgery or why the person needs surgery. This would be like an accountant learning the development of Windows and Excel in order to know how to use the program and do calculus. When you're an accountant you're not thinking "O.K. deduct from the gross sum the common denominator and remember Bill Gates and the DOS system" Neither does a Surgeon loom over the patient saying "Suction.... Clamp... Species... Genealogy.... Natural selection... survival of the luckiest and fit"

The evolutionist is being disingenuous when they say that evolution is fact because it's the
Genetic Descent with modification (over time) because this is just applied to breeds and the variations within families. They always know that when the topic is evolution it is referring to a Cow to a Whale. Rather they are just avoiding the hard questions and seem to treat the topic and the serious questions about the flaws of the theory as humerus.
The idea that Christians are unscientific because they reject the views of Evolution between species to new major groups of life. or the creation of the universe is flawed. Although some or most Christians don't see the point in discussing science this does not mean all Christians are ignorant.
Often Atheists will say "you don't understand" like a teenager yelling at their parent for not accepting their rebellious new life. This is absurd if not backed up with an intellectual response. Even so when an atheist evolutionist approaches with this attitude then there may have been a communication barrier on the side of the christian (eg. conclude common knowledge or inference) Because to keep the conversation fresh often Christians try to dumb down the discussion rather than bring College terminology into it. And if we can not be considered a Senior student or Professor ourselves as Christians disagreeing with the evolutionary view we are there for unintelligent and uneducated.
In a previous blog I mentioned submission to authority. This is the case for most evolutionists in this blog as they would say that even if they don't understand, if you're not smarter and written more books and shown new evidence that has been confirmed by peer review (which is biased to evolution ONLY) then you will never have the authority to claim any study or statement against a figurehead of the evolutionary choice.
We Christians are guilty of this in some degree but we don't always throw out the logic of any chosen evidence to support evolution against god. Only we reserve our god as the Ace in the hole, but still some of us acknowledge that the evidence THEY choose would confirm their theory. Though the majority of atheists won't consider god, as it's a supernatural explanation to the Humanist natural world.

So I was going to just summarize this blog with "it's a fact because it's a FACT and it's accepted as a fact" Well only 31% of surveyed world scientists DON"T believe in a god.

You see if a creationist secretly did lab work and submitted a paper proving intelligent design and special creation through the god of the bible YHWH, it would be dismissed because it doesn't agree with the natural world theory on how life works.
Show an evolutionist a list of creation believing scientists in the related fields they'd just pass it off as "they are just ignorant to the general conclusion of their peers"

You see folks and fellow Christians, these are Fools as long as they continue with this stubborn attitude. We often feel we are charged to teach them but I tell you no matter how much you want to grind their noses into the other evidences they won't see because they're obsessed with not having god but rather a progression of life through struggle.

Remember to dust your sandals and leave town when the gospel is not welcomed.

1 comment:

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.