A fictional president introducing a fictional explanation of origins?
The foundation of Science is observation and experimentation. No one has ever observed Life arise apart from Life and Life's programs. No one has ever witnessed program arise by accident from nothing. No one has ever shown that cells form magically from the muck by only random, natural processes. And no one can answer the question: When the first human being arose, with whom did he or she reproduce?
Darwinists take one fact -- that random, minor genetic mutations occur -- and from it leap nonsensically to the conclusion that from a first accidental cell all Life -- including us -- arose.
Besides the fact that genetic mutations are typically either neutral, harmful, or deadly to an organism, no one's ever seen a mutation result in newer, more complex program, structure, or function.
Neither do living things evolve into significantly-different forms; Life is stable, even over the Darwinists' "millions" of years. After almost 400 million years, the coelacanth is a coelacanth. After several million years, the ancient camel's DNA matches the modern camel's. Geckos and frogs on a hidden plateau in Australia undisturbed for millions of years are still only geckos and frogs. Darwin's finches were still ... finches. And after tens of thousands of generations, Lenski's E. coli evolved into ... E. coli with an eating disorder. (They're still bacteria.)
To believe Darwin's creation myth, not only must you believe that for which no evidence exists, but you have to deny what you know is empirically-true. You have to violate Science's fundamental tenets.
Darwin's creation myth is atheistic naturalism conducting its own Inquisition. It's Gaia in a lab coat.
It isn't Science; it's science fiction.
Tuesday, March 11, 2014
A fictional president introducing a fictional explanation of origins