You misunderstand scientific method.
I have investigated the scientific method.....what is not to understand? They have evidence that requires investigation; they form a hypothesis, and then go about trying to verify it. But if their overriding premise is skewed towards a certain result, then that is what they will deduce.....their minds will be led there and imagination will fill in the blanks. I was astounded at how many ‘assumptions’ were passed off as ‘fact’.....and how many 'suggestions' sounded like substantiated conclusions based on facts......but there were no facts.....just supposition that sounded plausible.
Preconceptions are irrelevant. Demonstration is everything.
Preconceptions dictate everything. Evolution of the ‘macro’ kind is THE preconception, even though science cannot prove that it ever happened. Interpretation of evidence will always fall into line with that premise.....and will fall within those set parameters. No scientist will dare to argue outside of it.
Not if they did it for good reason. They'd get a Nobel Prize instead. But fundamentalism got its modern impetus from Whitcomb and Morris's The Genesis Flood (1961) and in the intervening sixty years fundamentalism hasn't put even one teensy weensy scientific scratch on the (modern) theory of evolution.
A Nobel Prize for shooting their cash cow? Are you serious?
This issue isn’t about religion verses science.....this is about truth verses fiction.
If you have issues with “fundie” YEC nonsense, then I couldn’t agree more......but IMO, neither side has the truth about how life began or how the myriad varieties of life appeared (often suddenly) over time......and none are willing to budge on their own unsubstantiated position. This creates a divide and a lot of ill feeling on both sides....but the truth should not do that..... it means a yielding for both parties......however, it seems neither will budge.
Both require the same amount of ‘faith and trust’ to cling to their “beliefs”. Killing God has become a virtual blood sport. But the immortal Creator cannot be killed, and no one can deny that unlike the animal creation, we humans express a need for spirituality......our history confirms that, and science cannot explain why humans alone need to worship.....something. They can speculate, but they simply don’t know. We humans behave in very predictable ways, and it’s not hard to see “worship” behavior expressed in human activities...even non-religious ones.
Why is that the case, do you think?
Why? Because both sides in this story haven’t really evaluated the evidence without their own pre-conceived ideas getting in the way. I believe that there is middle ground that allows an accurate translation of the Bible, and true science to agree.
If the Creator is the greatest scientist in existence, then his existence is confirmed by his creation.....giving it a different explanation will not alter the truth. Such astonishing complexity as observed in nature, cannot come about by blind chance. It is too well planned for that. Planning requires forethought, and forethought requires intelligence....how is that not a logical deduction?
Intelligent design and purposeful direction are seen everywhere.
If that line of reasoning is valid, it leads you straight to the question, What real thing does the word "God" intend to denote, and how did that thing come into being?
Just as there are things that science cannot explain, no human can explain the existence of the Creator....but we get to know a lot about him by what he has put in place.....the laws that govern our universe, did not come out of thin air. The complex systems that operate on earth, demonstrate intelligent planning, or no life would survive. How many fortunate flukes can you have before you run out of probability?
And then we can add, We don't know what happened before the Big Bang, but reasoned enquiry is the only procedure whose participants are actually trying to find out.
No matter how sophisticated their apparatus becomes, no mere mortal will duplicate the force or power behind creation. The Big Bang is beyond the scope of any human to even imagine. Try to contemplate the magnitude of the something the size of the universe and then compare that to the smallest observable life form on earth....it is staggering. Creation needed a Creator, more powerful that the sum of its parts.
If God is a myth, then evolution is also a myth. It is “believed” by many people....but there is no way to prove that it ever happened.
I can’t prove that God exists, but I have reason to believe in his existence, using the same evidence that science uses to deny him. Its all in how you view these things...what you want to believe....or disbelieve.
That would explain the biology but the physics would have quite a few questions left over,
Then perhaps the scientists need to learn what the Creator knows.....by comparison, they are not even out of their infancy yet. They are like ants on a railway track looking at the looming image of an approaching locomotive, assuring each other that it doesn’t really exist.......do the ants know that the railway track they are standing on was built for a purpose? Will denying the existence of the locomotive soften the impact at all?
Nature is reality, the world external to the self which we know about through our senses.
Nature is a product.....we live and experience its reality. Does no one ever ask where we got our incredible senses in order to experience this reality in so many ways? How many amazing systems are needed to feed information through our senses to our main control centre......that extraordinary biological computer in our cranium that dictates how we respond to external stimuli. Just accidental?
Suggesting that the complexity of the workings of the human body, or the physiology of the myriad other creatures with whom we share this unique planet (let alone the range of complexity of systems that governs the earth itself and indeed the whole universe) can come about by the blind forces of “nature”....doesn't it have to dawn on even the most intelligent among us that "accidents" like these can't keep happening.....like winning the lottery a thousand times in a row......but then, don’t we have to wonder if that level of intelligence might lead them to make decisions out of ego, rather than admitting an inconvenient truth?
Jesus himself said that God has
“hidden” his truth from
“the wise and intellectual ones and revealed it to young children”.....what a blow to their ego, to be outsmarted by uneducated "children". (Luke 10:21) Who knew that being intellectual could be a handicap?
