Martin McPhillips, whom I often cite here, is a great and intelligent new (I can say that: I’ve been at it more than a year) blogger. He’s an awesome writer–far, far better than I.
But man: Schiavo, combined with Easter Sunday, combined with the Pope, and I just can’t take this religious integration anymore without comment.
So here he takes on evolution vs. intelligent design. Wow. Can he really believe this?
If you care to, take a moment to delve into those citations. I have. Without exception, every single one precedes from a single premise: God created the world. You see, to these "scientists," which is a contradiction in terms if you know anything about science, evolution can never be anything more than the bastard stepchild of their convolutions.
And don’t talk to me about "evolution is just a theory." Say that, and you’re just exposing your scientific ignorance. Relativity, which has been verified time and again, is "just a theory." Evolution is not an hypothesis. Neither is relativity.
Let me illustrate the absurdity, from just one of his citings:
But the "scientific outlook" they have in mind is one which, by definition, excludes God from any role in the world, from the Big Bang to the present. So this is fundamentally a religious position-a fundamentalist position, if you like–and it’s being taught in the schools as a fact when it isn’t even a good theory.
Get that. Science, by definition, excludes God. Moreover, to exclude God, on premise, implies taking a religious position. I’d have to think very, very hard, but I still don’t know if I could come up with any instance of having experienced such a breathtaking inversion of reason and scientific method in a mere two sentences.
Here’s the thing, if you care to think through this. Science has changed its position on a million things a million times. That’s what science does. It seeks the truth, whatever it may be. It continually seeks new knowledge, integration of that knowlege, and refinement of its understanding of nature. The fact that science has been compromised by the collectivist seeking of grant money is lamentable, but not fatal (so far).
Religion is another world. It stands on a premise: God. As such, it is wholly incompatible with the scientific method and no reconciliation is remotely possible–ever.