Do visitors come from the Science section to R&S to learn about God and good Science in the same place ?

WELCOME !

>>>>>>>>>>>..

A Common Problem With Scientists

As we have seen, there are more than a few reputable, educated scientists who say that the evidence points to the existence of a Designer or Creator. A few go still further. They question the scientific integrity of their colleagues who dogmatically dismiss the existence of God.

For example, geophysicist John R. Baumgardner notes: “In the face of such stunningly unfavorable odds, how could any scientist with any sense of honesty appeal to chance interactions as the explanation for the complexity we observe in living systems? To do so, with conscious awareness of these numbers, in my opinion represents a serious breach of scientific integrity.”

Renowned physicist Richard Feynman brought up another facet of scientific integrity. In a university commencement address, he spoke of “a specific, extra type of integrity.” He said that this included “bending over backwards to show how you’re maybe wrong.” To do so, he said, “is our responsibility as scientists, certainly to other scientists, and I think to laymen.”

How often do we find evolutionists applying such phrases as “maybe wrong” to their theories? Sadly, such modesty seems to be in short supply among them. In truth, modesty and integrity should lead more scientists to admit that science, which is limited to a study of the physical realm, is ill-equipped to answer questions about the existence of a Creator. What, though, about religious leaders who advocate creationism?

http://wol.jw.org/en/wol/d/r1/lp-e/102004443?q=SCI...

A COMMON PROBLEM WITH RELIGION

LET US REASON TOGETHER

11 Answers

Relevance
  • 7 years ago
    Favorite Answer

    Evidence for evolution is merely speculation or biased conjecture. Basically one starts with the premise "Since evolution is true then...". A faulty premise will inevitably lead to a wrong conclusion no matter how brilliant the reasoning. Such statements as "observed instances of speciation" are mistaken on two points, 1) that genetic variation will lead to a new kind, and generally, 2) many opposed to the Bible assume that it describes the creation of species, as Darwin believed, but a Genesis "Kind" describes something else:

    Lit., “according to its kind (genus).” Heb., lemi•noh′; Gr., ge′nos; Lat., ge′nus. The term “kind” here means a created or family kind, its older meaning or definition and not as present-day evolutionists use it.

    Often claims regarding evolution are merely "zhi lu wei ma "

    http://mathn2art.wordpress.com/2008/11/0…

    Darwin knew that the fossil record of his day did not support evolution however he hoped that later finds would vindicate him. Today there are over 200 million fossils and billions of micro-fossils collected and categorized but there is no empirical evidence for evolution today either.

    At the start of what is called the Cambrian period, the fossil record takes an unexplained dramatic turn. A great variety of fully developed, complex sea creatures, many with hard outer shells, appear so suddenly that this time is often called an “explosion” of living things. A View of Life describes it: “Beginning at the base of the Cambrian period and extending for about 10 million years, all the major groups of skeletonized invertebrates made their first appearance in the most spectacular rise in diversity ever recorded on our planet.” Snails, sponges, starfish, lobsterlike animals called trilobites, and many other complex sea creatures appeared. Interestingly, the same book observes: “Some extinct trilobites, in fact, developed more complex and efficient eyes than any living arthropod possesses.” A View of Life, by Salvador E. Luria, Stephen Jay Gould, Sam Singer, 1981, pp. 638, 649.

    Are there fossil links between this outburst of life and what went before it? In Darwin’s time such links did not exist. He admitted: “To the question why we do not find rich fossiliferous deposits belonging to these assumed earliest periods prior to the Cambrian system, I can give no satisfactory answer.”The Origin of Species, Part Two, p. 90.

    These facts prompted biochemist D. B. Gower to comment, as related in England’s Kentish Times: “The creation account in Genesis and the theory of evolution could not be reconciled. One must be right and the other wrong. The story of the fossils agreed with the account of Genesis. In the oldest rocks we did not find a series of fossils covering the gradual changes from the most primitive creatures to developed forms, but rather in the oldest rocks, developed species suddenly appeared. Between every species there was a complete absence of intermediate fossils.”Kentish Times, England, “Scientist Rejects Evolution,” December 11, 1975, p. 4.

    Scientist Francis Hitching in his book The Neck of the Giraffe writes: “When you look for links between major groups of animals, they simply aren’t there.”

    Many researchers agree that this vast and detailed record shows that all the major groups of animals appeared suddenly and remained virtually unchanged, with many species disappearing as suddenly as they arrived. After reviewing the evidence of the fossil record, biologist Jonathan Wells writes: “At the level of kingdoms, phyla, and classes, descent with modification from common ancestors is obviously not an observed fact. To judge from the fossil and molecular evidence, it’s not even a well-supported theory.”

  • 7 years ago

    The people answering in Science probably stay far away from this section, haha! I notice the comments over in Environment and Green Living are rather intelligent over-all. I notice too that I can express what the facts are without getting thumbs down. Even getting ones that agree. No longer are people scoffing at "Global Warming" because now it is evident by the weather changes. Of course, that leads us to the subject of "Ignorance is Bliss" doesn't it?

    On the article link it mentioned this that I wanted to highlight. Reason is, people should download this book and read it because it truly is beneficial. On the same web-site, click on Publications:

    If you are open to weighing the evidence on the matter, we urge you to do so. The book Is There a Creator Who Cares About You? is designed to help you in this vital quest for answers.* In addition, it will help you to weigh a second body of evidence for the existence of God: the Bible.

    The Bible contains a great deal of evidence that it was inspired by a superhuman intelligence. For example, it contains many prophecies, or history written in advance. Some of these describe the very conditions of our modern world! (Matthew 24:3, 6, 7; Luke 21:10, 11; 2 Timothy 3:1-5) Humans cannot reliably foretell the future. Who but God could do such a thing?

    However, the Bible does more than help to answer the question of whether God exists. It also teaches us his personal name, describes his personality, and tells how he has shown an interest in mankind over the years. It even reveals what he has in store for us. In all such areas, science is powerless to help us find answers. Really, human science cannot bring lasting hope into our lives. Nor can it establish proper morals and values.

  • 7 years ago

    Splash frog,

    Got to love your mentality on aliens.

    You want to assume that survival of the fittest is the only thing that lead to the complex life we see today. That the aliens must have also come up under this "survival of the fittest", yet that they are going to be peace-loving atheists.

    Perhaps aliens do exist and they also believe in creation because they KNOW about the complexity of the universe. Or perhaps they do not believe in God, in which case I would sincerely doubt their noble intention. Likely they got to the top of the food chain on their planet through more than just hugging and cuddling with the other animals.

  • Anonymous
    7 years ago

    Nobody is going to take their science lessons from creationists.

    "How often do we find evolutionists applying such phrases as “maybe wrong” to their theories?"

    Richard Feynman was right, scientists should try to falsify their own theories, but, if falsification fails, they have no reason to go around saying "we may be wrong".

    If evolution was proved wrong, biologists would probably think that Christmas had come early, because there would be whole new vistas of research opening up before them, but it stubbornly seems not to be wrong.

  • How do you think about the answers? You can sign in to vote the answer.
  • ?
    Lv 4
    7 years ago

    Psalms 107:27 describes perfectly for me the state of mind of WT’s 8 GB members:

    “They reel and move unsteadily like a drunken man, and even all their wisdom proves confused.”

  • 7 years ago

    No, refuge from kids asking their homework questions is the leading cause, amusement being a close second.

  • 7 years ago

    If aliens are smart.. At all... They could take one glimpse of the religion or politics sections here then run. Run away back to their galaxy.. Humans are too stupid to deal with..

  • That's a good thought

  • 7 years ago

    Ah, thanks for clarifying you are indeed trolling and not serious.

    What a relief! Was afraid you have gone off the rails there, buddy.

  • Maka
    Lv 7
    7 years ago

    no, mostly just take a break and have a laugh or two.

Still have questions? Get your answers by asking now.