
May 19th, 2003, 07:21 PM
|
 |
Lieutenant Colonel
|
|
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Orlando, FL
Posts: 1,259
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
|
Re: "Real" ringworlds
Quote:
Originally posted by Loser:
A mini-essay on science, faith, and Southern Baptists
|
I agree that creationism is a theory of faith. I also say that evolutionary theory (macroevolution, abiogenesis, etc.) is a theory of faith--that is, a theory which by definition places itself outside of the realm of science. It is not scientific theory, but naturalistic theory. As such, it has no claim to the respectability of science.
By "evolutionist," I do not refer just to the scientists, but their promoters, the textbook authors, the professors, etc.--in general, those who believe in evolution (as "creationist" usually means "one who believes in creation"). The public could do a better job of looking past the surface--they could also look deeper into politics, but few will do that. It is because of this that political deception is widely effective. I place the major blame in two places--textbook authors, who should have a grasp of the difference between science and theory; and teachers/professors who do know the difference, but often blur over the distinctions, especially in lower level science classes. I realize that a 100-level course isn't going to delve into molecular biology; but it's not too much to ask to say, "This is how we think it happened, but there's room for disagreement." The professors who are out to destroy their freshmen students' faith are pushing an agenda, not teaching science.
[edit] Note: This is to Loser's first essay, not the one immediately below. 
[ May 19, 2003, 18:23: Message edited by: Krsqk ]
__________________
The Unpronounceable Krsqk
"Well, sir, at the moment my left processor doesn't know what my right is doing." - Freefall
|