History, Evolution, and The Darwin Debate

Darwiniana header image 2

religion and evolution…//A mis-misconception about evolution

April 20th, 2018 · No Comments

The ‘Understanding Evolution‘ website is one of the worst darwinian (disinfo, are these people, lying?) dogma centers. This discussion of religion and evolution is absolutely pointless unless you specify what you mean by evolution and religion. Both fields are nearly hopeless quagmires, perhaps they kill each other off. Evolution is obviously taken as darwinism here, and religion as christianity… Evolution by natural selection is so ridden with fallacies it is small wonder religionists tend to oppose it, although most christians simply lie and take darwinism without challenge. Darwinists imply man has no soul or spirit and that reincarnation is fallacious. It is not easy to explain a ‘soul’ emerging by natural selection, easy?? impossible…So who got it right and how will you reconcile darwinism and christianity? the fact/theory discussion is almost pointless idiocy. The doctrine of resurrection contradicts the laws of physics and is almost certainly false, so here science and religion are at odds.

I can think of fifty theories of evolution and dozen forms of future religion that could let ‘religion and evolution’ coexist. But I can’t as yet prove any of them and in any case christianity as a near idiocy is disappearing anyway so who cares? It would be nice if science could resolve the evolution mechanism, but it might not be able to do so.
Noone knows how evolution works, as yet, so the discussion is simply up in the air. We see the ‘fact’ of evolution in deep time, the theory of evolution is incomplete and deals with something intractably complex. But a science can be incomplete and still be science, a science in progress…But it can’t really be used to dogmatize about world views: a scientific world view is aspired to for the future.
The question of evolution suffers ambiguity over issues of teleology and if teleology is real, this would tend to put it beyond ‘science’ in its current form. Mathematical suggestions of teleology or the equivalent (directionality,fine tuning etc…) are not plentiful but do exist (causality from the future is mathematically thinkable and might work in a larger dimensional system). Darwinian evolution can’t really handle the evolution of consciousness, or even define it. But religion is almost as bad. Religions like buddhism seem to be an exception but in fact aren’t really.

we cited yesterday an exotic theory from bennett that blends science and religion beautifully but you need to beware of using it because it is controlled monopoly material of sufi gangster gurdjieff…
Darwinists/scientists completely reject all forms of the occult. Religions generally set it to a fringe and brainwash converts against it.
Bennett’s theory is of course not yet science, but a kind of new age science fiction…

The “Understanding Evolution” website produced by the University of California at Berkeley is an excellent resource, and is especially good for its list of “misconceptions about evolution” page. There are eight categories of misconceptions with answers to all of them at the links. Here, for instance, is one category for general misconceptions about evolution and science. Misconceptions about evolution and the nature of science Evolution is not science because it is not observable or testable. Evolution is ‘just’ a theory. Evolutionary theory is invalid because it is incomplete and cannot give a total explanation for the biodiversity we see around us. Gaps in the fossil record disprove evolution. Not bad, eh? However, as organizations often do when trying to convince people that evolution is true, they have to stick their noses into theology, as Berkeley does with this question and its “correction” (my emphasis). Misconceptions about evolution and religion MISCONCEPTION: Evolution and religion are incompatible.

Source: Why Evolution Is True

Tags: General

0 responses so far ↓

  • There are no comments yet...Kick things off by filling out the form below.

Leave a Comment