Comment on La Sierra “outraged” over Educate Truth article by Jonathan Smith.

I am so very puzzled that people are adamant about evolution when all conclusions drawn are all guesswork.

You read statements like
It probably changed…
Maybe that accounts for…
That is a possible reason…
etc
etc

Let us face it, whereas the Bible stated definitely what happened, evolutionary theory stings out guesses after guesses, assumptions after assumptions and after a time when these are not challenged they assume this as fact.

I cannot find one naturally occurring phenomenon that can be explained by macro evolution, NOT ONE. And people who claim to believe in God put aside a clear unambiguous account of life and hang their hats on speculation and wild assumptions.

Can evolution explain why a man is different from a woman in many ways yet each need to be alive simultaneously for the human race to continue? Can evolution explain the complexity of the brain or even a single cell?

According to the theory of evolution, there is some development of an organism if over a very long period of time changes occur. The big assumptions are:

1) There is a long period of time
2) Somehow the organism (human or pre-human) will remain alive to allow these changes to take place
3) That any change taking place is beneficial

Sometime later a much improved organism evolves.

My analysis according to these theories, these “improving changes” can be either independent or dependent on what happened before but in all this the organism must remain alive. How does one explain how the nervous, the muscular, the circulatory, the digestive, the respiratory, excretory and skeletal systems of a human can develop in like manner.

From what I understand all these complex systems are mutually dependent and have to be coexistent at all times for the person to live.

When we consider that the reproductive systems of the male and the female are simultaneously needed to ensure the species continue then we see that the math to show the probability that all these necessary random mutations happening simultaneously does not exist for such a probability is ZERO.

In other words, mathematically speaking, there is no mathematician alive who can use math to show any positive (non zero) probability that all these mutually dependent complex systems could evolve in a mindless manner and yet be in place when needed.

No wonder the Psalmist was led to explain:
Psalms 139:13-16 For thou hast possessed my reins: thou hast covered me in my mother’s womb. I will praise thee; for I am fearfully and wonderfully made: marvellous are thy works; and that my soul knoweth right well. My substance was not hid from thee, when I was made in secret, and curiously wrought in the lowest parts of the earth. Thine eyes did see my substance, yet being unperfect; and in thy book all my members were written, which in continuance were fashioned, when as yet there was none of them.

I do not know why people accept foolishness and then try to pass that off as science.

Milton Friedman and Paul Samuelson debated about positive and normative economics many years ago. Positive is supposed to be “what is” and normative is supposed to be “what ought to be”. In all the arguments for evolution as science, we hear we cannot depend on miracles (singularity) and that science looks at the evidence and draws conclusions. Thus the argument is positivist.

Yet by disclaiming creation, evolution has rejected their own premise, by excluding a possible explanation for live. Thus “no creation explanation” is now normative. So their methodology and assumptions are now contradictory.

Secondly according to their doctrine, the evidence should give the clues. So they cycle among (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abiogenesis):

spontaneous generation
“Primordial soup” theory
The deep sea vent theory
Wächtershäuser’s hypothesis
Radioactive beach hypothesis
“Genes first” models
“Metabolism first” models
Autocatalysis
Clay theory
Gold’s “Deep-hot biosphere” model
“Primitive” extraterrestrial life
Extraterrestrial Amino Acids Seeding Earth
Lipid World
Polyphosphates
PAH world hypothesis
Multiple genesis
Abiogenesis

and more.

This makes my head spin! The only conclusion we can draw that there is a crazy force compelling these deluded souls to conduct spiritual suicide. They would rather spin the craziest stories that deny their own definition of science than accept creation.

May God have mercy on their souls

Jonathan Smith Also Commented

Recent Comments by Jonathan Smith