Nothing, however, but nothing, could rival the sales boost provided by Donald Trump [in his first term]. This president embodies the insight that given a willingness to lie without compunction, norms of veracity can be abolished with extraordinary speed. It is one of the central demands of the Party, in Orwell’s book, that you “reject the evidence of your eyes and ears”. Trump put that maxim into effect on his very first day in office of his first term, with his insistence that people ignore the evidence of their senses about his Inauguration day crowds.

Continue reading “6) Intelligence Or Intelligentsia?”

The ancient Greek philosophers, by use of thought processes alone, laid the foundation for the way science is conceived and investigation pursued in our modern world, while believing in the existence of a Creator, a Supreme Being, and/or lesser gods.

Thales (d. ~550 BC) is known as the Father of Science because he used observation, scientific knowledge and logic, developing theories of mathematics, engineering, astronomy and medicine to find explanations for natural phenomena which had previously been attributed to the 12 Olympian gods. At the same time, he did not reject gods, and believed these energy beings were present in everything.

Pythagoras (d. ~500 BC), whose geometry theorem is still one of the most widely used, also contributed to the development of science. Pythagoras believed that souls are immortal.

Parmenides (d. ~450 BC) is considered the father of metaphysics. He believed that real existence could not be perceived through the senses, only through logic and reasoning. His main principle was that “everything is one”. This exactly matches Albert Einstein’s 20th century deduction that energy and mass are the same.

Anaxagoras (d. ~425 BC) argued that nothing can perish, the ingredients of the material world are constantly changing form and everything has a portion of everything. Again, matching Einstein’s Theory of Relativity.

Continue reading “8) Proven Facts Or Biased Ideas?”

“avoiding profane and vain babblings, and oppositions of science falsely so called: Which some professing have erred concerning the faith.” (I Timothy 6:20-21)

There were three major revolutions in scientific thought that prepared the way for a successful theory of evolution.

The first major change in scientific thought was in the field of biology. Linnaeus, the Swedish biologist, had proposed the first successful taxonomy of all species of plants and animals. This taxonomy abandoned the theory of the chain of being that claimed that all living creatures formed an unbroken scale of complexity and nobility, terminating with the most complex and noble of all, humanity. Instead, Linnaeus showed that life could be divided into separate categories, each divergent from the others.

How does this make sense? Evolution is the theory of a chain of complexity, so Linnaeus’ “abandonment” of this idea cannot support Evolution. 

The truth is that Linnaeus was not abandoning anything but building on Aristotle’s (384–322 BC) existing classification of animal species in his History of Animals, while his pupil Theophrastus (c. 371–c. 287 BC) wrote a parallel work, the Historia Plantarum, on plants.

Continue reading “SECTION II: Science Falsely So-Called”

The Big Bang Theory remains the most popular explanation for the existence of the universe, despite its inherent failure to provide an explanation for matter out of nothing and organization out of chaos.

Because it eliminates an Almighty Creator / Sustainer / Authority / Judge.

About 13.8 billion years ago the universe sprang into existence in an event known as the Big Bang.

“In the beginning” there was an equal amount of mass and energy condensed to the size of a soccer ball, called a Singularity. This is clearly based on Einstein’s Relativity where E=m, without, however factoring the c2 Force that controls the stability or conversion or chaos of the effect of one on the other. 

Then, obviously requiring a Force which is not explained by the Big Bang Idea (not actually a Theory) the universe suddenly, without explanation blew up / inflated / expanded, becoming vastly larger.

There’s a tremendous amount of research and speculation about what started inflation, but nobody knows. There is no evidence we can point to; no observations we can make; no experiments we can perform.

One thing that has been absolutely mathematically determined by these studies is that temperature fluctuations are thousands of times smaller than a Big Bang predicts. 

How long inflation lasted is not only unknown, but unknowable. Nonetheless, astronomists have no problem assigning a date of “about 13.8 billion years ago.” 

Continue reading “11) The Big Bang Theory Is Just A Show”

The Problem: By the mid 19th century it was obvious that Earth was much older than 6000 years,

It was not obvious.

There is no evidence for this claim. It was asserted out of the rejection of biblical moral authority as the article itself admits. “After all, if the Earth were too young for there to have been time for evolution, the evolution debate would be over.”

Initially, three lines of evidence for long ages of earth’s existence were pursued.

Each failed.

Continue reading “12) Dating The Earth”

[In 2015] the world said hello to Homo naledi, a new species of ancient human discovered in South Africa’s Rising Star cave… at least 15 individual skeletons—one of the richest hauls of hominid fossils ever uncovered.

But one significant problem clouded the excitement over the discovery: The team doesn’t know how old the fossils are…Everyone from professional paleontologists to interested members of the public raised the same question: Why hadn’t the team dated the fossils yet?

The simple answer is: Because dating fossils is really difficult.

Continue reading “13) Absolute Dating”

Relative dating stems from the idea that…objects closer to the surface are more recent in time relative to items deeper in the ground.

Relative dating can be determined through comparing finds in carefully mapped strata.

Several problems arise with the use of stratification for dating. Rodents, for example, can create havoc in a site by moving items from one context to another. Natural disasters like floods can sweep away top layers of sites to other locations.

Nonetheless, relative dating is paleontology’s basis for dating fossils back to millions of years old.

Continue reading “14) Relative Dating”