FACTS AND FAITH by David Brollier In reply to the editorial +quot;Facts and Faith,+quot; I
FACTS AND FAITH
by
David Brollier
In reply to the editorial "Facts and Faith," I must conclude that
the editor knows little about either. The so-called "theory" of
evolution has no scientific facts to support it. It rests mainly on
cummulative fossil parts that indicate a certain evolution possibility.
In the scientific profession this would be called a hypothesis, not a
theory. We have done a disservice to this esteemed community by failing
to label it properly and teaching evolution as fact when it still awaits
evidence to even move it into the realm of theory.
On the other hand, while the teaching of creation does find itself
linked to religious belief, it does have substantial scientific facts on
which to base itself. One such evidence is that, according to the laws
of science, if evolution did exist we would becoming less complex, not
more. To put it another way, we would be evolving into ape-like
creatures, from them to lower vertebrates. Another highly acclaimed
theory is that of "relativity" with which we have used Einstein's
equation to produce atomic energy. This is the destructive activity of
his theory. The constructive side of this equation actually shows how
creation is possible. The highest court in our land has now decided
that to teach the more scientifically sound theory of creation must not
be enforce as an alternative to evolution. Majority or not, truth
remains to be truth. It is sad that we as a nation have decided it is
unconstitutional to teach the truth.
... HA! Fooled you! Mary slept with the devil.
--- FMail 0.94
* Origin: The Main Frame BBS! Eldred, NY (914)557-3567 (1:272/85.0)
From: David Dahl
To: All Msg #985, Oct-04-93 10:35:02
Subject: [3/6] ChristoBabble
Calif. adopts creationism guide
(with commentary following)
SACRAMENTO, Calif. (AP) -- California's Board of Education
yesterday bowed to Christian fundamentalists and unanimously adopted
new guidelines on the teaching of evolution that take note of the
theory of creation.
The board voted 9-0 to approve the guidelines for science
textbooks in the biggest school system in the nation, with 4.6 million
students.
The old guidelines said evolution must be taught in schools, and
they offered no guidance to teachers or administrators on dealing with
questions from students about the biblical theary of creation.
As a result of yesterday's vote, the new guidelines hold that
"some people reject the theory of evolution purely on the basis of
religious faith" and that such "personal beliefs should be respected
and not demeaned."
However, the new document, unlike the old, gives evolution a
central place in science education, arguing in detail the importance of
teaching evolution.
"It's very clear in the document that evolution will be taught
and creationism will not," said Bill Honig state superintendent of
instruction.
The board has been at the center of a struggle with national
implications that pits religious groups against science teachers and
administrators who say the theory of evolution is no more controversial
than gravity or electricity.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
The problem with the above article is that society have etched
out a way of saying one thing while doing what they planned all along.
The major conflict seems to lie in the area of "the separation of
Church and State" and not on any real scientific fact. The problem
with this type of thinking is that there IS no separation of Church and
State. That Christians are to be involved with their society, even run
for political office. State on the other hand, according to the United
States Constitution, is not to define, prohibit or censor in any way
one's free worship. What we have today is the exact reversal of the
terms set forth by the Constitution; Christians are made to feel
ashamed to run for political office and are often censored in doing so
by slanderous speech. The State, however, has decided it CAN impose
itself on one's free worship. They feel they can dictate what is and
is not a religeon and when such people can and cannot exorcise their
rights of freedom of worship.
With this backround it is easy to see how a law was passed in
California "forcing" teachers to teach Creation, when in fact they do
not want Creation taught. They hold to the thinking that the psuedo-
scientific theory of Evolution MUST be taught. If evolution exists I
wonder how it by-passed its proponents.
... Every absurdity has a champion to defend it.
--- FMail 0.94
* Origin: The Main Frame BBS! Eldred, NY (914)557-3567 (1:272/85.0)
From: David Dahl
To: All Msg #986, Oct-04-93 10:35:04
Subject: [4/6] ChristoBabble
EVOLUTION AND CREATION
by
David Brollier
The letter to the editor (a reply to Frank Toman 9/25/87) by
Lonnie Kwartler typifies current humanist thinking. Any type of
opposition to THEIR particular way of ideology MUST be wrong.
Therefore these people go on their way passing and supporting laws
that violate the First Amendment and accuse any attempt of free worship
as censoring the rights of the people. In reality it is these people
who are censoring any view but their own.
As an example of this let me quote a portion of Kwartler's letter:
"Allowing the Louisiana law to stand would place the `church' in
`state' clothing, which would be one size (or idea) fits all.
Those who do not believe in creation or in the state requiring it
to be taught would be told their failure is both a matter of faith
and reason."
The Louisiana law sought to teach both evolution and creation.
If his logic follows we can then substitute evolution where Kwartler
has creation. The text would then read, "Those who do not believe in
evolution or in the state requiring it to be taught would be told their
failure is both a matter of faith and reason."
Every student has the right to all the available information. It
is then up to the student to decide for himself what is right.
Arguments against this are arguments against our own personal freedom.
That is censorship.
... I'm PRO-CHOICE. Please don't shoot me in the back.
--- FMail 0.94
* Origin: The Main Frame BBS! Eldred, NY (914)557-3567 (1:272/85.0)
From: David Dahl
To: All Msg #987, Oct-04-93 10:35:04
Subject: [5/6] ChristoBabble
SCIENCE AND FAITH
by
David Brollier
Creation or evolution? Which is a true science? Some seem to
think that evolution is true science while creation is a matter of
faith. This is only half right. Neither theory can be put through a
series of tests in order to validate or invalidate the theory. Both
creation and evolution regardless of scientific facts must in the end
be a matter of faith. This in itself does not place the theory in the
realm of religion. It simply means that in order to accept either of
these views we must have faith because the facts that are available are
not enough, scientifically, to support either.
The issue then is not which of the two is scientific but rather
it is the responsibility of educators to provide all of the available
facts. Once the teaching of evolution was banned from the classroom.
Evolutionists, instead of offering a balanced study of origins, have
seen fit to ban the teaching of creation altogether and teach evolution
as an assumed truth. That is censorship. That is in direct violation
of my constitutional rights.
... ...Keep the Books. Burn the Censors!
--- FMail 0.94
* Origin: The Main Frame BBS! Eldred, NY (914)557-3567 (1:272/85.0)
From: David Dahl
To: All Msg #988, Oct-04-93 10:35:06
Subject: [6/6] ChristoBabble
SHIFTING BLAME
by
David Brollier
You can always tell who the bad guys are...we're the ones wearing
the white hats. Eric Ericson's letter to the editor (5/22/87) is a
prime example of shifting blame and trying to act like the leopard who
changed his spots.
Item 1 - He blames the Constitution for forbidding prayer in
public schools. The truth of the matter is that humanists are
using their interpretation of the Constitution in order to obtain
a "self-god" society.
Item 2 - He states that "no scientist respected in the field of
paleontology denies the fact of evolution." Please read "A Case
for Creation," by Wayne Frair and Percival Davis. Also, creation
can be at least theoretically proven with Einstein's equation
E=MC . As for evolution, go back to the furthest point you can
and you still have something that must have evolved. Where did
it come from? The Second Law of Thermaldynamics (the Law of
Entropy) says that things move away from their starting point in
a random manner. This being the case, the aforementioned evo-
lution would then be less complex, not more.
Item 3 - He pits the recent Roberts/God hostage situation against
the "plethora" of social ills by secular humanism. Since when do
two wrongs make a right?
... "Easy credit, terms available..." - Satan
--- FMail 0.94
* Origin: The Main Frame BBS! Eldred, NY (914)557-3567 (1:272/85.0)
E-Mail Fredric L. Rice / The Skeptic Tank