I respectfully disagree with Dr. Pitman on his semantics regarding …

Comment on Back to Square One… by Grace.

I respectfully disagree with Dr. Pitman on his semantics regarding the application of this term to science. Rather I think science theorizes and conjectures then attempts to prove its theories empirically. That is different than faith which implies belief without fact.

Dear Ken,

It looks like I must disagree with both of you. I believe that Albert Einstein expressed a true understanding of the meaning of science. Essentially, a scientific theory can never be proven true. It can only be demonstrated to be false.

Grace Also Commented

Back to Square One…

Regarding evolutionists what religion were you alluding to that is being fraudulently maintained:

I had in mind the religion that is best characterized as the grand universal belief that is most persuasive in terms of mediocre reasoning and superficiality.

if evolution is a blind face atheistic conspiracy why are all these Christian groups incorporating it?

Their choice is a consequence of rejecting strenuous work, conflicts and faith in favor of following the minimal principle that Ellen White talked about.

“Popery is the religion of human nature, and the mass of humanity love a doctrine that permits them to commit sin, and yet frees them from its consequences. People must have some form of religion, and this religion, formed by human device, and yet claiming divine authority, suits the carnal mind. Men who think themselves wise and intelligent turn away in pride from the standard of righteousness, the ten commandments, and do not think it is in harmony with their dignity to inquire into the ways of God. Therefore they go into false ways, into forbidden paths, become self-sufficient, self inflated, after the pattern of the pope, not after the pattern of Jesus Christ. They must have the form of religion that has the least requirement of spirituality and self-denial, and as unsanctified human wisdom will not lead them to loathe popery, they are naturally drawn toward its provisions and doctrines. They do not want to walk in the ways of the Lord. They are altogether too much enlightened to seek God prayerfully and humbly, with an intelligent knowledge of his word. Not caring to know the ways of the Lord, their minds are all open to delusions, all ready to accept and believe a lie. They are willing to have the most unreasonable, most inconsistent falsehoods palmed off upon them as truth.” ST February 19, 1894.

“A prayerful study of the Bible would show Protestants the real character of the papacy and would cause them to abhor and to shun it; but many are so wise in their own conceit that they feel no need of humbly seeking God that they may be led into the truth. Although priding themselves on their enlightenment, they are ignorant both of the Scriptures and of the power of God. They must have some means of quieting their consciences, and they seek that which is least spiritual and humiliating. What they desire is a method of forgetting God which shall pass as a method of remembering Him. The papacy is well adapted to meet the wants of all these. It is prepared for two classes of mankind, embracing nearly the whole world—those who would be saved by their merits, and those who would be saved in their sins. Here is the secret of its power.” The Great Controversy, page 572.


Back to Square One…

Interestingly partticle physicists at Cern think they have found a particle that travels faster than the speed of light that would jeopardize Einstein’s theory of special relativity. They will need empirical evidence to do so, not a leap of faith.

Ken, my agnostic friend,

I don’t believe that you have correctly discerned the true meaning of the story. Most of what I see there is just shameless hoopla. I’ll never get over the tremendous amount of propaganda and unspecified conjectures that physicists allow being inserted in their reporting of frivolous news in physics. Specifically, I see the story as a probably irrelevant discrepancy in an extraordinarily difficult measurement that is off by a mere 2/1000 of 1%. The expectation is that the neutrinos should be traveling at the speed of light or just a little bit slower. The scandal is that physicists are extrapolating the easily disputed measurements into the unfounded conclusion that time-travel might be possible. http://topdocumentaryfilms.com/faster-than-the-speed-of-light/

The real lesson therefore is that you should consider the possibility that evolutionists are also perpetuating a scientific fraud for the purpose of maintaining a religious belief as well as an economic self-interest.


Back to Square One…
I agree with this piece of what Sean Pitman wrote: “even scientific conclusions, theories, and notions of reality are based on leaps of faith to one degree or another.” However, let’s not overlook the importance of viewing science as a system of thought that produces results. The arguments of Intelligent Design proponents are fine for elementary school students, but real innovative scientific thought has to prove itself applicable by producing powerful results in the physical world.