Eugene Shubert: Naturally, since that problem isn’t a scientific challenge. …

Comment on LSU forms faith in evolution by Sean Pitman, M.D..

Eugene Shubert: Naturally, since that problem isn’t a scientific challenge. Science doesn’t concern itself with the non-science of Kuhn.

Scientists are very much concerned with the subjectivity problem posed by Kuhn.

It all boils down to one simple question Eugene. That is, can you predict the future of anything in the world that exists outside of your mind with absolute perfection? – without even the possibility of error for your “scientific” hypotheses or theories?

Sean Pitman
www.DetectingDesign.com

Sean Pitman, M.D. Also Commented

LSU forms faith in evolution
I’m wondering why the Adventist Review published LSU’s above listed advertisement as the full back page cover of its latest World Edition? Don’t the staff at the Adventist Review know that they are contributing to the false impression LSU is trying to cultivate about their support of the SDA Church as an organization? – that they are actually subverting what the Church says it is trying to promote as basic fundamental pillars of the Adventist message?

Very frustrating…

Sean Pitman
www.DetectingDesign.com


LSU forms faith in evolution

Eugene Shubert: “Science can be defined as the process of using empirical evidence to make predictions and test hypotheses in the effort to increase our understanding of the world around us. ID seeks to answer many of the same questions about life on Earth that science does. However, the two differ drastically in that ID invokes supernatural explanations to explain natural processes, while science explains natural processes using empirical data. As the study of ID does not involve the use of empirical evidence to make predictions and test hypotheses, it cannot be considered a science under any circumstances.”

There are entire scientific disiplines devoted to the concept of detecting the need for intelligent design – – to include forensic science, athropology, and yes, even SETI science. All of these mainstream sciences are based on the detection of evidence for intelligent design (ID).

The same is true when it comes to detecting the need for ID behind certain features of biological complexity. One does not need to prove the need for “supernatural” intelligence (which is impossible for natural intelligences to do by the way) to determine that a very high level of intelligence was certainly required to produce high levels of biological functional complexity – with very high degrees of scientific predictive value.

Those who argue that ID Theories produces no useful predictions in science are simply mistaken – even when it comes to mainstream sciences. The detection of the need for intelligent design to explain certain phenomena is most certainly within the realm of scientific investigation.

For further discussion of this concept see:

http://www.detectingdesign.com/detectingdesign.html

Sean Pitman
www.DetectingDesign.com


LSU forms faith in evolution
Foundational SDA Pillars of Doctrine to “Stand Forever”:

Regarding the efforts of the professors and leadership of some in SDA schools of “higher education” to challenge and remove some of the fundamental “pillars of Adventism”, especially with regard to a literal six-day creation week, the following comments of Mrs. White are quite relevant:

When the power of God testifies as to what is truth, that truth is to stand forever as the truth. No aftersuppositions, contrary to the light God has given, are to be entertained. Men will arise with interpretations of Scripture which are to them truth, but which are not truth. The truth for this time, God has given us as a foundation for our faith. He Himself has taught us what is truth. One will arise, and still another, with new light which contradicts the light that God has given under the demonstration of His Holy Spirit…

[Satan] knows that if he can deceive the people who claim to believe present truth, and make them believe that the work the Lord designs for them to do for His people is a removing of the old landmarks, something which they should, with most determined zeal, resist, then he exults over the deception he has led them to believe…

We are not to receive the words of those who come with a message that contradicts the special points of our faith. They gather together a mass of Scripture, and pile it as proof around their asserted theories. This has been done over and over again during the past fifty years. And while the Scriptures are God’s word, and are to be respected, the application of them, if such application moves one pillar from the foundation that God has sustained these fifty years, is a great mistake. He who makes such an application knows not the wonderful demonstration of the Holy Spirit that gave power and force to the past messages that have come to the people of God.

— Ellen White, Preach the Word, p. 5. (1905); Counsels to Writers and Editors, p. 31-32. (1946)

Sean Pitman
www.DetectingDesign.com


Recent Comments by Sean Pitman, M.D.

After the Flood
Thank you Ariel. Hope you are doing well these days. Miss seeing you down at Loma Linda. Hope you had a Great Thanksgiving!


The Flood
Thank you Colin. Just trying to save lives any way I can. Not everything that the government does or leaders do is “evil” BTW…


The Flood
Only someone who knows the future can make such decisions without being a monster…


Pacific Union College Encouraging Homosexual Marriage?
Where did I “gloss over it”?


Review of “The Naked Emperor” by Pastor Conrad Vine
I fail to see where you have convincingly supported your claim that the GC leadership contributed to the harm of anyone’s personal religious liberties? – given that the GC leadership does not and could not override personal religious liberties in this country, nor substantively change the outcome of those who lost their jobs over various vaccine mandates. That’s just not how it works here in this country. Religious liberties are personally derived. Again, they simply are not based on a corporate or church position, but rely solely upon individual convictions – regardless of what the church may or may not say or do.

Yet, you say, “Who cares if it is written into law”? You should care. Everyone should care. It’s a very important law in this country. The idea that the organized church could have changed vaccine mandates simply isn’t true – particularly given the nature of certain types of jobs dealing with the most vulnerable in society (such as health care workers for example).

Beyond this, the GC Leadership did, in fact, write in support of personal religious convictions on this topic – and there are GC lawyers who have and continue to write personal letters in support of personal religious convictions (even if these personal convictions are at odds with the position of the church on a given topic). Just because the GC leadership also supports the advances of modern medicine doesn’t mean that the GC leadership cannot support individual convictions at the same time. Both are possible. This is not an inconsistency.