Forum
Human Cloning Foundation Hails British Scientists
Paralyzed
Walk Again
Childless Couples
Essays
The Benefits of
Human Cloning
All the Reasons to
Clone Human Beings
The Top Ten Myths
about Human Cloning
Human Cloning is the Cure for Infertility
Infertility is
a Disease
Books
People
Reports
Archives
Feedback
Donate
Links
Website Links
About Us
Contact Us
Site history
Site Map
Past Books of the Month
John Kunich's Books
Copyright
Illegal Beings: Human Clones
What is not absolute?
libfemme ( 12/27/2004, 18:16:41 )What is not absolute? That other naturalists beside Darwin proposed evolution? I was trying to make the argument that modern evolutionists are not Darwinians in the same sense that Christians are christians. It is not Darwin that evolutionists "believe in". Most evolutionists haven't even read Darwin. I haven't. What happened is the courts and the public pretty much decided that religion would not be taught in American public schools. Creation apologists could get creation taught there because it was based on faith.Consequently they switched tactics and tried to claim that evolution was a religion, so it too could not be taught in public schools. The argument doesn't stick.Religion has prophets who receive special knowledge given to them alone to reveal. Science only has the "first on the scene", that is it acknowledges the first scientist to publish knowledge that is available for anyone else to verify. In fact if lots of somebodies can't verify the same information then the whole theory gets rejected.Religion doesn't work that way. It depends on personality. Someone who is presumed to be right, is presumed to speak the truth with every word they utter. Writting down what they have to say then makes sense.Science doesn't care who the speaker is. It cares whether or not the information is verifiable. If Darwin says ham comes from chickens then Darwin is wrong in that statement. That, however, doesn't affect the validity of the theory of natural selection because Darwin's not talking about natural selection.Personal attacks on a prophet are signifcant. Personal attacks on a scientist are not. Creationists argue based on how they function in regards to knowledge. They see everything as a religion. If they could see the world in any other way, well, then I guess they would no longer be creationists.
This Message is being posted for educational purposes, as well as for comment and criticism, by the visitors to the HumanCloning.org Foundation website (www.HumanCloning.org ).
Disclaimer: Information provided on this web site is for educatonal purposes only. It is not a substitute for, nor can it replace advice from your own physician.
HumanCloning.org™ Established December 11, 2002.
Who's Afraid of Human Cloning?
Disease Prevention and Treatment