1/31/2007
Ernest Haeckel, Evangelist for evolution and apostle of deceit
A great article “Ernest Haeckel, Evangelist for evolution and apostle of deceit over at Answers in Genesis exposes more of the hypocrisy of the alleged ’science’ that was invented to prop the theory of Evolution in the 1800’s. There are many more examples besides this one, demonstrating the lies that are being told to prop that the theory is ‘fact’, and which rules out any other form of rational debate on the subject of origins.
Haeckel’s drawings of the eating habit and reproductive cycle of an alleged Moneron to which he gave the scientific name, Protomyxa aurantiaca, as published in his book The History of Creation. The extent of the detail is the measure of his fraud, as the Monera did not then and do not now exist!
January 31st, 2007 at 11:35 am
If evolution isn’t the answer, which religion has the facts on the beginning? Christianity, Hinduism or the Druids?
January 31st, 2007 at 12:58 pm
Actually, the answer can be found in science if it’s allowed to postulate and test theories. With Evolution, it’s simply not allowed. But we should call it what it is, then; an irrational worldview based on a Godless system of ethics (e.g. eugenics) that kills innocents and rules out any other point of view; not something that was borne of science, which is supposed to be objective and open to new theories.
Good science holds a degree of skepticism, and any scientist, as well as laymen, should look at both sides of the issue. This is a part of making an informed decision, right? We shouldn’t side with those in cultural power; that would be silly. We should all seek the truth, but we DO have ample reasons to mistrust science because of some of its most vocal adherents to humanist tendencies. Actually it’s not a case of mistrusting real science at all, but speculative interpretations of the unobservable past which can’t be tested. Or, examples of which are obvious frauds which they continue to circulate because they have no ‘true’ examples.
Unscientific speculations of sinful men about the past over God’s clearly written Word are subject to close scrutiny. Those who believe in a straightforward, literal Genesis are labeled as having being “blind”, “rigid”, or having a “wooden interpretation.” Clear historical statements, then, are ‘wooden’? You can easily not be wooden when it comes to other historical events and statements, such as Jesus’ death and resurrection, and that there was no death of man or animals before sin. Jesus was “wooden” about Genesis, and so should all Christians be.
We should all apply to the “wooden” words of Paul:
1 Thessalonians 5:21Prove all things; hold fast that which is good. - King James Version
February 1st, 2007 at 9:49 pm
Thank you for your response. I have ‘cherry picked’ a few of your points to respond to.
Science doesn’t postulate theories, people do and that’s the good news. Someone smarter or more observant can postulate a better theory and prove it. Sometimes theories have to wait a long time until even the methods of testing are invented. There is progress in medicine, economics and unfortunately war.Sadly, abortion will never completely stop. There should be a statute criminalizing it. Abortion is murder so pass a statute defining abortion as murder. Stop wasting your time and energy picking on the Supreme Court or evolution. Confront the cowardice of Congress and the President for failing to pass a law criminalizing abortion. Maybe they don’t want to do that for fear of losing their voters? It baffles me why there is no statute.
Compelling for me however is “speculative interpretations of the unobservable past”. This of course cuts to the foundation of our laws and religious faiths. For example, I don’t have to see you commit murder to actually convict you of it but there should be adequate evidence. I can’t see germs but have witness their effects. I don’t see atoms and molecules and protein but sure love to eat and bear witness to that. Anyway the unobservable past is incongruent to the fossil I hold in my hand. Sorry is the religion and shallow is the faith of those threatened by a theory of the past.
It isn’t your views of evolution or science that concern me but your views of religion. If you had been born in Iraq, what religion would you be following? Most likely the one your parents taught you and that would not likely to be Christianity. Religion is often more an accident of geography than an act of faith so skepticism about religion is wise as well.
Religion is a smaller thing than faith. From ancient times till now many good people have had faith but expressed it through a variety of religions.
Many have faith. Many believe that there is more to others than waht we can see and that doing good things really matters. Men of all faiths get a bad feeling when they about to, have or are doing something wrong. Throughout history good men and evil men often share the same religion but rarely share the same faith.
Paraphrasing my self and Einstein: While a thousand men cannot shake my faith and religion, “it would only take one man to prove my theory wrong.”
You don’t have to trust science, save that for your faith.
February 2nd, 2007 at 5:05 am
I don’t have to accept your comments, and your boneheaded stubbornness is just going to get you banned. This is not a discussion forum and I don’t appreciate trolls leaving their droppings here. You had the audacity to leave that ridiculous comment here twice, convinced that you have the right over me to inflict your views on me.
I am simply not interested; and like it or not, I am entitled to my opinion. I pay for this space in order to share my opinions, and I don’t appreciate you, like an Islamist, coming here telling me how wrong I am.
Leftists have become the ‘thought nazis’, the ‘thought police’, and I don’t go for it.