[an ad for a new anti-evolution textbook series]
The backbone of Darwinism is not biological evolution per se, but electronic interpretation, the tenet that all physical, chemical, and biological processes result from a change in the electron structure of the atom which, in turn, may be deciphered through the orderly application of mathematics, as outlined in quantum mechanics. A few of the supporting theories are: degrading stars, neutron stars, black holes, extraterrestrial water, antimatter, the absolute dating systems, and the big bang, the explosion of a singularity infinitely smaller than the dot of an “i” from which space, time, and the massive stellar bodies supposedly sprang into being.
The philosophy rejects any divine intervention. Therefore, let the philosophy of Darwinism be judged on these specifics: electron interpretation and quantum mechanics. Conversely, the view that God is both responsible for and rules all the phenomena of the universe will stand or fall when the facts are applied. The view will not hinge on faith alone, but will be tested by the weightier principle of verifiable truths – the new discipline.
41 comments
The backbone of Darwinism is not biological evolution per se, but electronic interpretation
I think you have had shock therapy one time too many. Here, take this wrought iron key and go stand in a field, see what that can do for you.
The backbone of Darwinism is not biological evolution per se, but electronic interpretation ...
No, "Darwinism" a.k.a. evolution theory is entirely about biological evolution, backed at most by the assumption that nature follows comprehensible and predictable patterns. STRIKE ONE!!!
Therefore, let the philosophy of Darwinism be judged on these specifics: electron interpretation and quantum mechanics.
Classical evolution theory at best requires an empirical understanding of organic chemistry ... not the underlying quantum theory. STRIKE TWO!!!
Conversely, the view that God is both responsible for and rules all the phenomena of the universe will stand or fall when the facts are applied. The view will not hinge on faith alone, but will be tested by the weightier principle of verifiable truths the new discipline.
Bishop Berkeley and Instrumentalism say there's no observable difference between a universe which exhibits certain regularities because of non-intelligent "hidden mechanisms" and one whose regularities are ordained by some supreme being. Occam's Razor says the latter assumption is unnecessary. STRIKE THREE, YOU'RE OUT!!!
To see evolution in action, its really simple.
1. Procure one Lion.
Ah yes, that little known third volume of Darwin's, "On The Origin of Universes by Means of Natural Inflation".
Didn't he follow that up with "Being a Treatise on the Mechanics of Quantum Matter Rendered Sensible to Dummies"?
Isn't this one of Randi's laws?
Whenever you see the words "Quantum Mechanics" written in the middle of some pseudo-scientific babble, you know the author is full of woo.
In this case it's double-woo, of course.
"The view will not hinge on faith alone, but will be tested by the weightier principle of verifiable truths the new discipline. "
You're about 500 years late with your new discipline. It's called science. It has discovered the unifying principle of biology. It's called evolution.
Strange...I see words, strung into sentences...and yet, somehow, no coherent ideas are being conveyed here.
What you call your new "science" flat out renounces the axioms of naturalism. Real science, known in full as "natural science" (the clue's in the fucking name!), is founded upon the axioms of naturalism. You can dress up your ravings to look like textbooks all you want, hold classes for any deluded followers you can gather and proclaim it to be a learned institution, play at wearing a labcoat and running experiments, whatever; if you reject naturalism then you aren't doing science. Science IS naturalism.
You are either too fucking ignorant to recognise the fundamental principles of what constitutes science, or you're trying to steal credibility for your books by calling them scientific, knowing full well that they are not, because you know nobody with two brain cells to rub together will buy a fucking textbook on physics or biology that openly admits it is unscientific.
image
Seriously, fundies, just because your fairy tales book purports to explain everything doesn't mean that "darwinism" is some sort of grand unified theory of science. It doesn't even deal with the apparition of life proper, just with how that life changed to what it is today.
@FMG:
What are "degrading stars"?
Does he mean "degenerate" stars, as in white dwarfs and the cores of red giants, which are said to be in an electron-degenerate state of matter?
Or does he mean folks like Britney Spears?
From the author's pages at http://questforright.com/author.htm :
How about another note?
Even more!
"1983-2008 ongoing: The author amassed and critically studied an incredible amount of materials on important world issues, especially, quantum mechanics."
So, apparently a theoritical field in physics somehow disproves biology. Awesome!
"The backbone of Darwinism is not biological evolution per se, but electronic interpretation, the tenet that all physical, chemical, and biological processes result from a change in the electron structure of the atom "
On his media page, the author had this to say:
" The information contained in the voluminous project is all new from the get go, representing a complete rethink of the various areas of expertise. The material is tested by physical science, the old science of cause and effect. The extensive work represents the ultimate marriage between an in-depth knowledge of biblical phenomena and natural and physical sciences. As a welcomed result, The Quest for Right extends well beyond that which is taught -- indeed, can be taught -- at the college and university levels."
He goes on to describe himself as follows:
"Biblical Scholar and Scientist Extraordinaire."
This guy takes self-aggrandizement to a whole new level.
On his sample page:
"Chapter 2...Delves into the theory of catastrophism, the last-ditch effort by Christians to reconcile the "crowns of reptilian creation," the dinosaurs, with Biblical histories. Refutes the irreconcilable ideas of the polite adversary and maintains the integrity of scripture. Unveils the fundamental truth, based on the scientific record of creation, that the earth accreted from a watery nebula; the great surging mass of water and chemicals had no particular shape and covered an immense area of interstellar space."
Go there - it's a thing of beauty:
http://questforright.com/vol1content.htm
Please, for the love of your god(s) leave my quantum mechanics out of your homeschooling. You don't understand, you can't understand, and it probably makes baby jesus cry.
Seems that someone repurposed some pseudoscientific arguments into a straw-man, a parody of science, to then attempt to mislead a particular public already ignorant of biology and "debunk science" (their fabricated nonsense). I've seen this before, it's also been done by claiming that evolution is social Darwinism or that it's spontaneous generation...
Confused?
So were we! You can find all of this, and more, on Fundies Say the Darndest Things!
To post a comment, you'll need to Sign in or Register . Making an account also allows you to claim credit for submitting quotes, and to vote on quotes and comments. You don't even need to give us your email address.
