Quote:
Quote by: leegao  Theistic evolutionists can't be true evolutionists since they would rather toy with stagnant supernatural beliefs then think through rationalism.
A true evolutionist would not accept evolution without empirical evidence. Therefore a true evolutionist can not accept his/her theistic religion without empirical proof. |
Just what is "empirical" about the "idea" of evolution? Empirical by definition is evidence based on "observation" and experiment RATHER THAN THEORY. If evolution was indeed based upon empirical evidence, we would have the LAW OF EVOLUTION. For any evidence to be considered empirical it must be observed and reproducible in experimentation. Where has anything ever been observed "evolving" from one species into another in nature? Environmental adaptation contained and confined within any single species is not evolution. And what experiment is found to be reproducible that in fact concludes one species has evolved into another? Evolution is not based upon empirical evidence. It is based upon theory and interpretation of fossil remains and wrongly applied factors of individual species having the ability to adapt to their environment. If micro adaptation were not valid, the first virus that man was exposed to would have automatically made extinct mankind. Thus adaptation is not an evolutionary trait but an inherent fact of all life.
A theory, no matter what kind of spin one wishes to place upon it is still only an idea and not a fact. How can anyone define the origins of life when life itself has never been successfully defined? Life has never been successfully reproduced in experimentation, as no one can explain the force that indeed produces life. Just what force can take a group of organic cells that are inert and animate such? And once animation ceases, just where indeed does this force go? It must be energy, and energy cannot be destroyed only altered. 'when man has the capacity to explain this, the origin of this force would be self defined. As of today, there is no substance known to exist in the universe that can create life, thus it must be gestated on the subatomic level....a field indeed that man knows very little about. But, we are expected to accept some theory as to how man's life has evolved without any consideration whatsoever about the gestation of that life? There are in fact just to many gaps left unbridged along the evolutionary trial based upon theory for it to be actually considered as even based upon empirical evidence. Logan