| padib said: Thanks, I appreciate your post. I know that there is a consensus for a given theory and as it is, the stronger one prevails. I believe we agree. However, am I mistaken to believe that it so happened in the past that one previously prevailing theory was reiging dominant after a struffle for veracity, until another came to topple it? In other words, the fact that ToE is the current winner does not make it the be all end all, and that's what I oppose. I don't oppose looking into it, I oppose the fact that people take is as given and refuse to think outside the box. Had Einstein done that (remained closed-minded) would he have the theory of relativity as it is today? To me, all in all, I believe that there is credibility to the science behind ToE. But the rhetoric provided by the polemic crowd only leads us in the wrong direction. Some fear religion because it leads people to say "God said so therefore it is". But all I hear rather is "Science said so therefore it is" and leave no room for alternative theorizing. Creation scientists (the honest ones) are pursuing understanding nature around them from another vantage point, albeit a scientific one, but just a different one. Why are folks so opposed to that? Is that science? That's my gripe friend. |
I know not everyone would agree with me, but it is just as important WHY someone is doing something as WHAT they are doing. If a scientist were the one saying that some entity created everything, and had more evidence than conspiracy theories (which, face it, is one of the predominant circumstantial evidences in use) then I'd try to take the idea for its merit because he is trying to explore something new, which is what science is all about.
However, MY gripe is that exploration of the possibilities is not on the table for creationists. There is no push for discovery. It is what it is and there is no arguing with it. In fact, it is an Achilles heel of science that it uses methodology that people can call conspiratorial. Carbon Dating, for example is called a conspiracy, just because it is not understood, or other scientific principles involved are misunderstood.
And yes, you are correct that scientific theories are debated..however...they are usually debated with OTHER scientific theories. The theory of geocentrism came as a result of examining movements of stars, and a faulty assumption. There was originally evidence. It was then later, after much threat under the church, that another theory, using NEW evidence appeared. It was even longer after that that it was realized the sun was not the center of the universe, just the solar system, that that the galaxy had it's OWN center. These are all things that stood at least for some time, through evidence available. But it's again not some haphazard decision. Like I mentioned in my first post, these ideas are all related, it's only the specifics which are replaced. At it's root is "orbit occurs" and it's just a matter of what is orbitting what.
This ToE vs Creationism, again, is not even on the same page. It's one body of overwhelming evidence coming from the process of speciation. And the other trying to replace it, is a philosophical idea. If ToE were ever to be replaced, it would be replaced with more refinement, not something completely different.
In fact, the replacement of theory usually springs from study error. LIke, Copernicus back in the day was like, "hey baby, check out my telescope, if geocentrism is right, mars should be appearing in about a quarter-hourglass" - 15 minutes later- "damnit, this never works properly, I'll never get laid at this point. I'm going to figure out how this works and then get all the tail in the world". BUT- this isn't the case. It's "Daddy, if dinosaurs never lived with humans, did they only live for one day?" - "You mean the story of creation? No baby, dinos and humans lived together, scientists are wrong" - "but they said dinosaurs went extinct millions of years before.." - "YOU ARE A WICKED CHILD AND WILL BE PUNISHED WITH THE FLAMES OF HELL". That's how I see it at least...probably because my dad is a devout christian and spanked me for arguing carbon dating with him.
