Trapping Evolution
| “Imagine that you are walking with a friend in the woods. Suddenly your friend is pulled up by the ankle by a vine and left dangling in the air. After you cut him down, you reconstruct the situation. You see that the vine was tied to a tree limb that was bent down and held by a stake in the ground. The vine was covered by leaves so that you would not notice it and so on. From the way the parts were arranged, you would quickly conclude that this was no accident - this was a designed trap. Your conclusion is not based on religious beliefs; it is based firmly in the physical evidence...The bottom line is that we need additional information to answer questions such as who, what, where, when, why, and how the trap was designed. But the fact that the trap was designed is apprehended directly from observing the system” (Michael Behe, Science and Evidence for Design in the Universe, 127-128). |
posted by Matthew Wireman at 8:29 AM
Comments on "Trapping Evolution"
-
Matthew Wireman said ... (Sat Dec 17, 09:15:00 PM) :
-
Matthew Wireman said ... (Sat Dec 17, 09:36:00 PM) :
-
Will and Olivia said ... (Tue Dec 20, 08:53:00 AM) :
-
iconoclasm said ... (Tue Feb 07, 08:08:00 PM) :
post a commentThank you, lloyd for your comment. I must say, though, that it was a little more volatile than I thought someone who would disagree would sound.
I would like to hear what kind of defense you make for such sweeping statements. You say, "Where did the molecules come from can be easily and correctly morphed into where did your god come from." First of all, you are mixing two different realities. You are starting from the wrong square. You assume that God came from somewhere...and paralleling that with where molecules come from. Believe me, I did not just jump off a theist bandwagon with a knife to sharpen on some hollow argument. I was a self-proclaimed atheist. Faith is not a net to fall into, it is based upon sure realities and tried proofs.
If you see my other posts, I hope you see that faith is not wrapped up in some blind notion of an infinite being existing in my heart and therefore I posit God's existence. The point of all my posts is that there is sufficient evidence for the existence of God. It is a priori knowledge (a child knows it from birth), but it is suppressed by fine sounding arguments.
If one myth is as good as another, why are you so adamant that evolution is superior to intelligent design? If the beginnings of the existence of molecules can be easily explained, how come there has been on sufficient...or easy explanation as such. If you don't have to believe in magic, why does it seem that evolutionary theory pulls a rabbit out of its hat when dodging the quesiton of existence and purpose in life?
I hope we can continue this dialogue. I would like to hear more of what you have to say. If my argument is as empty as you claim it is, please let me know where the holes are. I admit, I have much to learn. I would appreciate any questions you might have so that I can clarify and explain my position better. So please do respond and hopefully we can understand each other's position better. And I hope that at the end of the day, no one will be able to say I am merely playing with words. That is the last thing on my mind...
Here's a great article that gets to the heart of what I am saying about faith and truth: http://www.str.org/site/News2?page=NewsArticle&id=5496
Where did the molecule come from? Where did God come from? Who's to say that God came first? Why not the Easter Bunny? I agree with Lloyd that these are good questions.
No matter what theory you begin with, everyone comes back to the same question: Why is there anything at all? Why does God, or a molecule, or the Easter Bunny exist in the first place? It is a question that all serious philosophies must attempt to answer.
Another question that could help answer this question is this: if there ever was a time when there was nothing, what would there be now?
There wouldn't be anything. Out of nothing, nothing comes. Nothing (whether God, a molecule, or the Easter Bunny) can create itself. It would have to be and not be at the same time and in the same relationship--an impossibility. In order for anything to exist at all, there must be something that has within it the power of existence and that has always existed. This thing cannot not exist. And it can give existence to other things. That is, it can create other things.
I guess the question is, if something has to have this power, who or what is it? I'm pretty sure I don't have this power. Is it a molecule? Theoretically it could be. However, a molecule posseses many other attributes that don't seem to jive with self-existence (eg. mutability, lack of self-awareness). Is it the Easter Bunny? I haven't ever met him so i don't know. Is it the God of the Bible? Well, there are probably a lot of good reasons for thinking that it could be.
I would ask Lloyd: who or what do you think has this power? And how does your answer make sense of your world and the universe we all live in? In this sense, i definitely don't believe that one myth is as good as another.
What do you mean by a child knows it from birth? Are you talking about a kid asking who made the world?