If science is to be defined as "empirical, observable & testable" then that definition should apply to evolution too! But what elements of evolution are "empirical, observable & testable"?
Duplicity: (Dictionary.com) “deceitfulness in speech or conduct; speaking or acting in two different ways concerning the same matter with intent to deceive; double-dealing.”
Surveys continue to reveal about two thirds of responders believe that God created the universe and life. Evolutionists argue that science is not performed by vote, thus what the majority believes does not matter. Yet the evolutionists often boast of the vast majorities of scientists that accept evolution as fact. They even have a running parody about the number of scientists named Steve who accept evolution as “Nothing in biology makes sense except in the light of evolution.” Since science is not established by vote or popularity then the evolutionists argument for the majority of scientists is also completely invalid.
Evolutionists claim that scientists who favor Intelligent Design (ID) should send their papers through peer review. Talk Origins states, “Even by the most generous criteria, the peer-reviewed scientific output from the intelligent design (ID) movement is very low”. But as the movie Expelled has thoroughly pointed out, the secular scientific journals publish papers that support ID at their own peril and thus they seldom do. In fact, it is very well established that those scientists who came out in favor of ID have themselves been expelled, heavily criticized, lost their jobs, prevented from attaining tenure and the editors who publish their works have been severely stomped on. (Dispite the persecution some papers have been peer reviewed). The story of Richard Sternberg is just one case showing the veracious nature of the ideological evolutionists against anyone who should allow for an ID foot in the door. Thus the argument of the evolutionists that their ID counterparts should publish through peer review is astoundingly duplicitous!
Religion is the evolutionists most fundamental argument against ID. They say that ID is religion masquerading as science but it is the mythology of evolution that is masquerading as science. A court ruling in 2005 by Judge Jones came down against ID proponents essentially declaring ID as religion. In his review of the case Jones defined science as, “NAS is in agreement that science is limited to empirical, observable and ultimately testable data . . . Anything that can be observed or measured is amenable to scientific investigation. Explanations that cannot be based upon empirical evidence are not part of science.’”
What about the double standard? Since science is to be defined as “empirical, observable & testable” then evolution should to be put under this standard as well. Yet evolution has not been put on trail since the Scopes trial (which evolutionists technically lost) yet evolution fails the definition of science standard. Where do the laws of physics come from, or matter or energy? Where does life come from? Evolutionists say that these are metaphysical questions yet evolution is founded on the assumption that all these things came about naturally, without any intelligence behind it! While evolutionists howl that ID is religion, their belief requires absurd and utterly unscientific conjecture that is untestable and unfalsifiable — thus according to Judge Jones evolution is religion. For every child knows that something (the universe) can not come from nothing, not to mention the laws that govern it. Louis Pasteur had proven that life only comes from life and so to assume otherwise is completely based in faith and I would say it is an absurd faith. Evolutionists do not demand that evolution be limited to what is “empirical, observable & testable”, because they would have nothing more than natural selection which creationists and ID scientists agree with. Why isn’t evolution put on trail? Why is this obvious double standard accepted among the media and educators? The ruse is that natural selection and mutations are said to produce evolution from a cell to humans but the evidence reveals less information not novel information. It is a huge snow job. Just throw in tons of studies and say over and over again that the “evidence is overwhelming”. Meanwhile there is no repeatable scientific evidence for evolutionary processess that produce new information in organisms, rather they only show examples of downward change and deformities.
The book, On the Origin of Species was first published in 1859; it was Charles Darwin’s first book and it immediately became a best seller. The bold claims of evolution were controversial in his day and they are controversial still today. Darwin proposed that all of the diversity of life came about by common descent through the mechanism that he called natural selection. Evolutionary ideas soon incorporated mutations which were first identified by Gregor Mendel. Today additional mechanisms for evolution include migration and genetic drift. It has been more than 150 years since Darwin’s book was published and the hard sciences (testable science) continues to reveal more and more dramatically that evolution is a dead end. Though natural selection, genetic drift, migration are mechanisms that account for varieties within animal kinds, they do not account for a common ancestor. While there are many species of birds, evolution does not account for the origin of birds.
Evidence for Creation is all around us. I remember Richard Dawkins saying that he could not understand that if there is a God why He has made it so hard to see His creation. I find that odd since Dawkins has said many times that though living things have an appearance of design they really are not designed. So if they look designed, then what do they have to have in order to be designed? For those who are willing to be open to the evidence this site will demonstrate that creation shouts design.
Modern scientists have discovered the nature of the cell, its inner workings and that it is built from the instructions found in DNA, a complex code, more complex than any code known to humans. One information scientist, Dr. Werner Gitt, describes information in five categories: statistics (numbers), syntax (rules), semantics (meaning), pragmatics (application) and apobetics (purpose). These are clearly described in my book, Evolution Shot Full of Holes. So when one comes to understand what each of these five levels are and realize that DNA is a code that reflects all five levels of information this gives us a deeper appreciation for the nature of information as absolutely designed. A book is only written by a person, an author. The DNA code likewise was written by a person, a super intelligence whom we call God. The Bible reflects this in Psalm 119: 13 & 14, “For Thou didst form my inward parts; Thou didst weave me in my mother’s womb. I will give thanks to Thee, for I am fearfully and wonderfully made; Wonderful are Thy works, And my soul knows it very well.” Also in the New Testament, John 1:1 “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.” The Word not only reveals Jesus as God, it also reflects the Creator as the source of information. Jesus the Creator is not an ethereal being, He is a personal God who created all of life and its variability with the DNA code built in.
Suppose a detective discovers English writing in the sand. This particular writing in the sand has more information (words) than an entire WorldBook encyclopedia set. Would the detective ever think that this volume of information came the waves, wind or from some natural means? This question may sound subjective and unscientific but it is not. All of science research is a process of eliminations and approximations toward the truth. There is no perfect headache medicine but some medicine works better for certain situations. William Dembski developed a formula for determining design. When an object is both highly specified (a recognizable pattern) and highly complex (intricacy) then we can have high assurance (predictability) that this object was designed. This formula for design can be tested. It can be run through trails to be demonstrated as to whether is holds to have high predictability, in other words it is falsifiable unlike evolutionary ideas. For our writing-in-the-sand example, the English writing is in patterns that are highly recognizable and the writing is highly complex. On a scale of 1-10 with 10 as the most likely to be designed this example is a 10.
Science must encompass many formulas for understanding the cosmos. Specified complexity is also a formula. Even more powerful, it is falsifiable, meaning it is an assertion that can be tested for it's predictability.
The evolutionists pound the idea that ID has nothing new, they say ID has no scientific evidence to prove that living things were designed. But it is not true. Evolutionists are not willing to be objective. They are not willing to consider the evidence. Specified Complexity is perfectly testable. And when it comes to DNA there is nothing that reveals design more clearly. This conclusion is not just by subjective reasoning but by using the scientifically valid formula of Specified Complexity. The more specified and complex an object is the more assurance we have that the object was designed. When analyzing DNA under the formula of specified complexity, on a scale of 1 – 10, DNA is off the chart, closer to 100 for reflecting design!
Evidence Press is here to encourage and embolden those who already believe in a six-day creation and to challenge those who don’t. This web site consists of articles and resources to help defend creation and expose evolution (the Darwinian view that there is a common ancestor for all of life) as a dead end.
The following video considers the source of information.
This next video discusses the nature of information.
Jim Bendewald
(608) 233-5556
