Sunday, April 8, 2007

Now Acceptng Submissions

My friend Larry does this with CityBeat's Living Out Loud Blog, so I'll give it a try.

Damion, a recent commenter here, sent me a submission on WATER and it was pretty funny so I put it up.
So here are a few guidelines:

-Send submissions to sunshinehs@gmail.com

-I'm not editing the content, but I reserve the right to insert pictures at will.

-Try to keep posts under 500 words.

-I'm fine with linking the post to your site or your blog, but make an effort to contribute to the conversation you inspire here.

-I'm more than happy to post something with which I disagree. What I'm looking for is material that is brief, concise, well-written, and something with a clever angle. In other words, it's not so much what you say, but how you say it.

3 comments:

Heather Annastasia said...

Oh, and try to stay on the subjects of politics and philosophy, however loosely defined.

Isaac said...

Dig Deep spend a week truly investing your time into the facts not theories- Will you -- Hope so


The Faith of the Evolutionist

by
John MacArthur

Thanks to the theory of evolution, naturalism is now the dominant religion of modern society. Less than a century and a half ago, Charles Darwin popularized the credo for this secular religion with his book The Origin of Species. Although most of Darwin’s theories about the mechanisms of evolution were discarded long ago, the doctrine of evolution itself has managed to achieve the status of a fundamental article of faith in the popular modern mind. Naturalism has now replaced Christianity as the main religion of the Western world, and evolution has become naturalism’s principal dogma.

Naturalism is the view that every law and every force operating in the universe is natural rather than moral, spiritual, or supernatural. Naturalism is inherently anti-theistic, rejecting the very concept of a personal God. Many assume naturalism therefore has nothing to do with religion. In fact, it is a common misconception that naturalism embodies the very essence of scientific objectivity. Naturalists themselves like to portray their system as a philosophy that stands in opposition to all faith-based world-views, pretending that it is scientifically and intellectually superior precisely because of its supposed non-religious character.

Not so. Religion is exactly the right word to describe naturalism. The entire philosophy is built on a faith-based premise. Its basic presupposition—an a priori rejection of everything supernatural—requires a giant leap of faith. And nearly all its supporting theories must be taken by faith as well. (See sidebar.)

Consider the dogma of evolution, for example. The notion that natural evolutionary processes can account for the origin of all living species has never been and never will be established as fact. Nor is it “scientific” in any true sense of the word. Science deals with what can be observed and reproduced by experimentation. The origin of life can be neither observed nor reproduced in any laboratory. By definition, then, true science can give us no knowledge whatsoever about where we came from or how we got here. Belief in evolutionary theory is a matter of sheer faith. And dogmatic belief in any naturalistic theory is no more “scientific” than any other kind of religious faith.

Michael Ruse is an evolutionist who testified in the 1980s at the infamous Arkansas creationism trial (McLean v. Arkansas). During the trial, he claimed that creationism is a religion because it is grounded in unproven philosophical assumptions. But Darwinism is a science, he said, because it requires no philosophical or religious presuppositions. Ruse has since admitted that he was wrong, and he now acknowledges that evolution “is metaphysically based”—grounded in unproven beliefs that are no more “scientific” than the set of beliefs on which creationism is based. See Tom Woodward, “Ruse Gives Away the Store: Admits Evolution Is a Philosophy” on the “Origins” Web site

Heather Annastasia said...

Is this a submission or a comment?

This isn't the spot for submissions, so I'll assume it's a comment.

Let's go over a few points here:

"most of Darwin’s theories about the mechanisms of evolution were discarded long ago"

Not true. Go to your local college library and pick up the latest Biology textbook. The particulars may have changed as we have learned more through observation, fossil records, and DNA mapping, but Darwin is by no means wrong or discarded.

"Naturalism has now replaced Christianity as the main religion of the Western world"

Christianity makes up 80% of Western Europe's population (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christianity_by_country) and 76.5% of America's population (http://www.adherents.com/rel_USA.html#religions).

"an a priori rejection of everything supernatural—requires a giant leap of faith. And nearly all its supporting theories must be taken by faith as well. (See sidebar.)"

I would say that rejecting the supernatural is the opposite of a leap of faith. And what sidebar?

"The origin of life can be neither observed nor reproduced in any laboratory. By definition, then, true science can give us no knowledge whatsoever about where we came from or how we got here."

To answer that I use the example of crime scene investigation. It's impossible to reproduce the murder of an individual, yet through scientific methods, we can investigate an event which took place in the past and very often solve crimes which were unsolvable 50 years ago.

I would also point out that we have created RNA in a labratory, and that we can observe evolution through fossil records and DNA mapping.

As for Michael Ruse, I have no idea who he is or what his primary malfunction happens to be.