Evolution Misconception #6 – Sacred Cow

Assertion:

Evolution is a sacred cow in the scientific world.  It is assumed to be correct and no one is allowed to question it.

Scientists who dare to question evolutionary theory will be ostracised and cast out of the scientific community.

Answer:

Evolutionary theory is far from being a hallowed institution.  Assuming something to be correct without questioning is NOT how the scientific community conducts itself.

The opposite is true.  A robust scientific community thrives on new discoveries and challenges to long-held beliefs and ideas. But these challenges must be presented through the proper channels that are recognised by the scientific community.  Making movies, CDs, self-published written materials, seminars to religious groups, etc may persuade the general public, but will not win any points in the scientific community.

Crying ‘unfair!’ and playing the victim will not win any respect either.

The hypocrisy of young-Earth Creationists who make this claim is stunning.  Young-Earth Creationists hold a literal reading of the Creation account in Genesis to be factual and not to be questioned.

Application:

The next time you come across the idea that the theory of evolution is sacrosanct, tell yourself and your children, ‘No, it isn’t.  Like all scientific theories, the theory of evolution is not exempt from close examination and questioning and testing.’

<< #5 – Atheistic | List of Misconceptions | #7 – Religion >>

Advertisements

Posted on Wednesday, March 23rd, 2011, in Evolution, Misconceptions. Bookmark the permalink. 8 Comments.

  1. Hello again! I just wanted to point out that creationists and evolutionists all have the same facts; they just look at them with different world views. Just as different detectives draw different ideas from the same evidence, so C-ists and E-ists draw different conclusions from the same evidence. Everyone is biased by their world view whether they like it or not. I know I certainly am! I think evolution is a fallacy, (I am talking macro evolution here, not micro.) and here is the main reason why. Because in all of observable, testable, and repeatable science, we have NEVER seen a cell gain information. This would be necessary for a single celled organism to gradually, over many generations, evolve into a different kind. Or for any kind of animal to evolve into a different ‘Species’. Have a blessed day!

    Like

    • Hi Reanne. Not all ‘evolutionists’ hold to the same world view. Furthermore, Evolution is not a worldview the same way that YECism is.

      If you are looking for evidence for Evolution, there is plenty. Just type in ‘Evidence for Evolution’ in your search engine and you will find information on the matter.

      Here is just ONE site to get you started: http://www.teachthemscience.org/evidence

      Have a blessed day!

      Like

  2. “Evolutionary theory is far from being a hallowed institution. Assuming something to be correct without questioning is NOT how the scientific community conducts itself.”

    It’s not SUPPOSED to be how the scientific community conducts itself, but the claim—which this comment rejects simply be asserting it to be false—is that it does conduct itself that way in this context.

    “But these challenges must be presented through the proper channels that are recognised by the scientific community.”

    These “proper channels” have admitted that they will not publish material that questions evolution.

    “Making movies, CDs, self-published written materials, seminars to religious groups, etc may persuade the general public, but will not win any points in the scientific community.”

    Contrary to this claim, many scientists /have/ been convinced by such publications. See http://creation.com/daron-himstedt for one example.

    “Crying ‘unfair!’ and playing the victim will not win any respect either.”

    Neither do compromise positions such as theistic evolution.

    “The hypocrisy of young-Earth Creationists who make this claim is stunning. Young-Earth Creationists hold a literal reading of the Creation account in Genesis to be factual and not to be questioned.”

    There is no hypocrisy. By the creationists at least. Creationists have a particular view, based on the revelation of the omniscient, infallible, Creator, and promote that view. The opposing group claims to be neutral/”scientific” but promotes a particular view based on its own biases. That makes the latter group the hypocrites.

    Application:
    The next time you come across the idea that the theory of evolution is not exempt from close examination and questioning and testing, tell yourself and your children that this is merely a claim by those who hold to evolution with ardour and faith, and that actual evidence shows otherwise.

    Like

    • “Creationists have a particular view, based on the revelation of the omniscient, infallible, Creator, and promote that view. The opposing group claims to be neutral/”scientific” but promotes a particular view based on its own biases. ”

      I get it. Creationists are holding on to and promoting views what were revealed by the Creator. Opposing groups (non-Biblical Creationists?) are not promoting the view as revealed by the Creator. Therefore, the latter group is wrong. Not to mention hypocritical.

      Like

  3. Having a slow, quiet day at the office, Philip?

    “The next time you come across the idea that the theory of evolution is not exempt from close examination and questioning and testing, tell yourself and your children that this is merely a claim by those who hold to evolution with ardour and faith, and that actual evidence shows otherwise.”

    I did this – for several years.

    Like

  4. I’m having a day off after a busy weekend, and catching up on a number of things.

    Okay, you did this for several years. But if the evidence supports this (which it does), why did you stop?

    Like

    • I would not have thought that responding to my blog would be of any priority on your to-do list. Surely you have bigger fish to fry?

      I stopped because the evidence does not support it. And I could no longer keep lying to my children and keep my integrity.

      Like

  5. “I stopped because the evidence does not support it.”

    You claim that you changed because of you integrity, yet you have ignored my refutation of your supposed evidence. Where’s the integrity in that?

    Like

Go ahead. Tell me your thoughts.

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: