Let's try a little honesty for once. Without a doubt scientists like Darwin and those who came up with the "Large Boom" theory (or...Big Bang, is it?) are not stupid people. But what is equally certain is that they were definitely misguided. At the core of their observations were a string of disregarded errors and anomalies that are usually not even mentioned. This is the honesty that is so lacking in modern evolutionary theory and universe (and Earth...etc.) dating systems. The problem is there are more errors than evidence. Things that do not add up, and if the true scientific theory were being applied, the theories (yes, I said theories) would have been thrown out long ago. I will not get into the counter evidence for these theories here because, quite frankly, I do not feel like writing a book (or 10!). If you are interested, I recommend "Tornado in a Junkyard" by James Perloff.
Truthfully, this intellectual dishonesty seems to stem from a violent, almost exaggerated, expulsion of anything being explained Biblically. Now I'm not claiming Creation is scientific (in that it can be measured, observed and repeated - because God did that only once) but there is much in the Bible that accounts for other phenomena that are used to support the idea that the earth is ''millions of years old''. A world wide flood, for example. This event found in Genesis would account for the geology and geography of our modern world. Mountains could have formed in very little time as waters receded. The Grand Canyon could have formed extremely fast as large amounts of water moved through wet sediment. Life could have fossilized and oil could have been produced by tons and tons of material piling up and causing pressure. But instead of this getting a consideration, scientists elect a more troublesome theory: millions of years. Truthfully, it seems to take more faith to believe in "millions of years" than it does Genesis.
This brief essay is not meant to be an argument against evolution or dating systems. As I said, I don't have the time, space, or energy to tackle such a thing. But the resources are there. What I am calling for is a bit of intellectual honesty from those who believe such theories. Consider the flaws of the argument instead of pretending they do not exist. Ignoring counter evidence serves no one because it is disingenuous and misleading. I have much more respect for the evolutionist that says, "Yes, there are things that we cannot explain, but this is what we have so far." I still disagree with the theory, but at least a statement like that can carry some respect. Let's bring honesty back into science.
Truthfully, this intellectual dishonesty seems to stem from a violent, almost exaggerated, expulsion of anything being explained Biblically. Now I'm not claiming Creation is scientific (in that it can be measured, observed and repeated - because God did that only once) but there is much in the Bible that accounts for other phenomena that are used to support the idea that the earth is ''millions of years old''. A world wide flood, for example. This event found in Genesis would account for the geology and geography of our modern world. Mountains could have formed in very little time as waters receded. The Grand Canyon could have formed extremely fast as large amounts of water moved through wet sediment. Life could have fossilized and oil could have been produced by tons and tons of material piling up and causing pressure. But instead of this getting a consideration, scientists elect a more troublesome theory: millions of years. Truthfully, it seems to take more faith to believe in "millions of years" than it does Genesis.
This brief essay is not meant to be an argument against evolution or dating systems. As I said, I don't have the time, space, or energy to tackle such a thing. But the resources are there. What I am calling for is a bit of intellectual honesty from those who believe such theories. Consider the flaws of the argument instead of pretending they do not exist. Ignoring counter evidence serves no one because it is disingenuous and misleading. I have much more respect for the evolutionist that says, "Yes, there are things that we cannot explain, but this is what we have so far." I still disagree with the theory, but at least a statement like that can carry some respect. Let's bring honesty back into science.
No comments:
Post a Comment