I just read an article by some uppity-up claiming that the half of Americans that don't believe in the "Theory of Evolution" are stupid because they don't know what a theory is. Rubbish!
Maybe instead of trying to belittle those "creationists" who have faith in one form of creation as "evolutionists" have their own faith in another form of creation, evolutionists would realize that we understand what a theory is, but instead, we have a problem with the package of nothing to everything as a "Theory of Evolution".
Why don't they define what evolution is instead of theory. I'll tell you why... Because they'd look silly to most of the world. I'll try to break down the various forms I see in the "Theory of Evolution" instead:
1. Cosmic evolution. They claim the big bang was an immense explosion that created all the matter of the universe. Fine. Where did that point mass come from?
2. Biological evolution. How did life create itself from non-living material? Where is the evidence? They say in a gazillion years it could happen. Ok, let's quicken it up, let's jump start it. Add energy to inorganic material and try to make it organic. Throw a bunch of inorganic material together in a test tube and pray to Darwin. It's not going to happen. Re-read the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics. The universe tends towards chaos, not order.
3. Macro-evolution. Can one kind change into another? Again, there is no evidence of this. Evolutionist continue to have faith that they will eventually find the "missing link" of macro-evolution. Horse to dog, fish to tree, etc. Again, no evidence for this.
4. Micro-evolution. Aha! Finally! This is variations within the kinds, the different races of humans, breeds of dogs, etc. This is the one level of evolution that all believe and why it's sometimes hard for those that haven't thought much about it to separate truth from what they've been taught in increasingly atheistic schools and continue to hear from our atheistic media.
The last form actually happens, but they package all the other forms into this unified "Theory of Evolution" and try to claim that since #4 is true, they must all be. Rubbish.
Evolutionists like to focus on the word theory in these debates to make them feel all scientific. When you talk to one, ask them to show you some evidence of any of the other three forms of their "Evolution". Until they can do so, I think we should downgrade the "Theory of Evolution" into nothing more than a hypothesis.
Oh, and by the way. The "theory of gravity" can be empirically proven. We may not completely understand it (hence the word theory), but we can test how it works. Their "theory of evolution" cannot empirically prove life spontaneously created from non-life.
Leave a comment