from 
JoeUser Forums
JoeUser Forums
Here's a debate that's going to go on for some time: Creation versus Evolution. People love to choose sides on this one, as the recent JoeUser post, "HERE'S THE PROOF THAT GOD EXISTS" by Marvin Cooley and subsequent postings demonstrate.
The author and sympathizers make some effort to debunk evolution. By using creation to polarly oppose evolution, they justify their argument when a logical step in the theory of evolution cannot be proved, or has been proven false. This argument style seems common among creationists, using negation logic. However, negation logic, or Contrapositive logic, cannot prove an identity, as the well known paradox suggests:
1)All ravens are black
2)The contrapositive statement: All nonblack things are nonravens
3)Therefore every red herring, every bluejay, every red stop sign you see proves that all ravens are black.
To see why this doesn't prove anything, substitute (1) with "All ravens are white". The point here is simply that by calling creation and evolution opposing theories, where disproving one proves the other is incorrect logic: "CREATION IS THE PROOF OF GOD. The creation around you does provide scientific proof of its Creator. The evolutionists attempt to explain a creation with no Creator. Yet, they offer only unproven theories. When offering their speculations, they suppose, hypothesize and guess...." writes Cooley, and then proceeds to prove by disproving.
The supporters of evolution often resort to similar logic: "The fact is that evolution is a sound scientific theory which undermines Christianity. Hundreds of years ago Christians thought the world was flat. Science proved them wrong..." writes OG San. But there's three illogical jumps made here. The first, suggests that Christians thought the world was flat, most likely should read, "Church policy demanded that the world was flat", a piece of dogma without concrete origins in theology. Christians are going to be associated with the church; but we should not equate church policies with either a summation of christianity or the origins, the logical foundation of creationism. The second erroneous suggestion, that because the church thought the world world was flat, then all other beliefs must be false, certainly does not follow. Although the Church has dangerously held the opinion of itself as the absolute vessel of truth, this does not debunk a distinct theory of creationism. The last logical error is the same problem as mentioned earlier: using contrapositives to prove its own identity.
"It's pretty hard to disprove evolution," writes Karma Girl, and Cooley responds by saying, "KARMAGIRL........Evolution is as false as the philosophy of liberalism. Every bone ever found, supposedly proving evolution, could be stored in your bedroom. It is the biggest lie the left has ever foistered on the human race."
I am uncertain that any logic was used by Cooley here. Cooley's passion is evident, but associating evolution with the "philosophy of liberalism" is not only illogical, but patently false. While the concept of evolution led to Hegel's theory "Evolution of Thought", and subsequently the Marxist theory of history (an extremely leftist perspective), a fundamentally associated concept of evolution is "The Survival of the Fittest" which in every principal suggests a reactionary view absorbed by Hitler and other Fascist ideologies (an extremely rightist perspective).
While Karma Girl's statement is certainly true, many tenets of the theory of evolution have been disproved.
More importantly, a new branch of science has emerged that suggests that viewing Evolution and Creationism as two opposing theories may be simply incorrect.
Quantum Physics places the entity "Observer" as dominant when referring to truth. "Observer" is present in many aspects of relativity, such as in the famous example:
"Two people coordinate ultra-accurate timers and light sensors. One person takes a timer and a sensor and sets up beside train tracks. The other takes his timer and sensor aboard a bullet train. When the bullet train passes the person beside the tracks, a beam of light is sent up to the ceiling of the train to strike a mirror, and the light will be reflected back to its source. Both people will clock the travel time of the beam of light."
Because the speed of light was believed to be a constant, the result of this experiment would show that the beam of light takes longer to complete its journey as timed by the observer outside the train, because the beam of light must traverse a longer path (an arc compared to up and down)!
In Quantum Physics, the physical perspective of the "observer" not only affects what is "real", but the mental perspective affects reality, too!
Many things have been written about this, and I will only go into examples upon request. Nevertheless, these new theories tend to blend concepts like evolution and creation, rather than debunk them. For theologists, Q.P. suggests that the link between humanity and God may be closer than realized; for scientists, Q.P. suggests that cyncism plays a huge roll in experiment results. Moreover, scientists/ evolutionists should realize that their dependence on so-called objective facts to produce logical conclusions maybe be impossibe, or an absurdity!
Copyright ©2004, ©2005, ©2006 Joshua Suchman. All rights reserved.
Taboo's Ezine Navigator: Article Index
Taboo Tenente: A Thinker's MFA Journey - Home
The Phallic Suggestion
Stone Soup Blog Forum
The author and sympathizers make some effort to debunk evolution. By using creation to polarly oppose evolution, they justify their argument when a logical step in the theory of evolution cannot be proved, or has been proven false. This argument style seems common among creationists, using negation logic. However, negation logic, or Contrapositive logic, cannot prove an identity, as the well known paradox suggests:
1)All ravens are black
2)The contrapositive statement: All nonblack things are nonravens
3)Therefore every red herring, every bluejay, every red stop sign you see proves that all ravens are black.
To see why this doesn't prove anything, substitute (1) with "All ravens are white". The point here is simply that by calling creation and evolution opposing theories, where disproving one proves the other is incorrect logic: "CREATION IS THE PROOF OF GOD. The creation around you does provide scientific proof of its Creator. The evolutionists attempt to explain a creation with no Creator. Yet, they offer only unproven theories. When offering their speculations, they suppose, hypothesize and guess...." writes Cooley, and then proceeds to prove by disproving.
The supporters of evolution often resort to similar logic: "The fact is that evolution is a sound scientific theory which undermines Christianity. Hundreds of years ago Christians thought the world was flat. Science proved them wrong..." writes OG San. But there's three illogical jumps made here. The first, suggests that Christians thought the world was flat, most likely should read, "Church policy demanded that the world was flat", a piece of dogma without concrete origins in theology. Christians are going to be associated with the church; but we should not equate church policies with either a summation of christianity or the origins, the logical foundation of creationism. The second erroneous suggestion, that because the church thought the world world was flat, then all other beliefs must be false, certainly does not follow. Although the Church has dangerously held the opinion of itself as the absolute vessel of truth, this does not debunk a distinct theory of creationism. The last logical error is the same problem as mentioned earlier: using contrapositives to prove its own identity.
"It's pretty hard to disprove evolution," writes Karma Girl, and Cooley responds by saying, "KARMAGIRL........Evolution is as false as the philosophy of liberalism. Every bone ever found, supposedly proving evolution, could be stored in your bedroom. It is the biggest lie the left has ever foistered on the human race."
I am uncertain that any logic was used by Cooley here. Cooley's passion is evident, but associating evolution with the "philosophy of liberalism" is not only illogical, but patently false. While the concept of evolution led to Hegel's theory "Evolution of Thought", and subsequently the Marxist theory of history (an extremely leftist perspective), a fundamentally associated concept of evolution is "The Survival of the Fittest" which in every principal suggests a reactionary view absorbed by Hitler and other Fascist ideologies (an extremely rightist perspective).
While Karma Girl's statement is certainly true, many tenets of the theory of evolution have been disproved.
More importantly, a new branch of science has emerged that suggests that viewing Evolution and Creationism as two opposing theories may be simply incorrect.
Quantum Physics places the entity "Observer" as dominant when referring to truth. "Observer" is present in many aspects of relativity, such as in the famous example:
"Two people coordinate ultra-accurate timers and light sensors. One person takes a timer and a sensor and sets up beside train tracks. The other takes his timer and sensor aboard a bullet train. When the bullet train passes the person beside the tracks, a beam of light is sent up to the ceiling of the train to strike a mirror, and the light will be reflected back to its source. Both people will clock the travel time of the beam of light."
Because the speed of light was believed to be a constant, the result of this experiment would show that the beam of light takes longer to complete its journey as timed by the observer outside the train, because the beam of light must traverse a longer path (an arc compared to up and down)!
In Quantum Physics, the physical perspective of the "observer" not only affects what is "real", but the mental perspective affects reality, too!
Many things have been written about this, and I will only go into examples upon request. Nevertheless, these new theories tend to blend concepts like evolution and creation, rather than debunk them. For theologists, Q.P. suggests that the link between humanity and God may be closer than realized; for scientists, Q.P. suggests that cyncism plays a huge roll in experiment results. Moreover, scientists/ evolutionists should realize that their dependence on so-called objective facts to produce logical conclusions maybe be impossibe, or an absurdity!
Copyright ©2004, ©2005, ©2006 Joshua Suchman. All rights reserved.
Taboo's Ezine Navigator: Article Index
Taboo Tenente: A Thinker's MFA Journey - Home
The Phallic Suggestion
Stone Soup Blog Forum
