Dakota Voice is based in Rapid City, South Dakota and features contributors from around the country. Dakota Voice examines local, state, national and world issues of interest to conservatives and Christians. … While most news sites see events through a secular worldview, Dakota Voice strives to maintain a biblical, Christian worldview. …
— Bob Ellis, Owner
Ellis writes about something we’ve mentioned before. He says:
Center for Science and Culture Director Stephen C. Meyer kicked off his new book Signature in the Cell: DNA and Evidence for Intelligent Design yesterday with a presentation at the Heritage Foundation (see video below).
So what we have here is a creationist’s report on Meyer’s presentation to the Heritage Foundation. We’ll give you some choice excerpts, with our Curmudgeonly commentary between Ellis’ paragraphs. You’ll have to click over to the Dakota Voice for any links that Ellis may have included in his text. The bold font was added by us for emphasis. Here we go:
As the accompanying article at the Discovery Institute points out, Dr. Meyer’s book exposes the fact that materialists/naturalists/evolutionists [sic] have a really hard time explaining the origin of life. After all, everything in science tells us that it is impossible for life to spring from lifeless materials. Therefore, materialists/naturalists/evolutionists [sic] rely on an unscientific event at a pivotal point in their theory of origins, even as they demand that only scientifically verifiable information be considered.
Okay, if he says so. Let’s read on:
Whether you believe God created the universe (as I do), or merely believe “a” designer created the universe, intelligent design theory assumes a designer outside of and independent of the laws governing the universe.”
That’s quite an assumption. Where — if not in the universe — might that designer be lurking? We’re not informed. Anyway, we’ll continue with Ellis’ column:
Meanwhile, materialists/naturalists/evolutionists [sic], by the self-imposed parameters of their own theory, insist that no supernatural cause may be considered … yet their own theories concerning the origin of the universe are impossible (something cannot come from nothing — has it ever been observed in science?).
This is powerful stuff! Here’s more:
As you see, creation and intelligent design are logical and rational within the framework of their own theory, while materialism/naturalism/evolution [sic] are illogical, irrational and impossible within the framework of their own theory.
Ah. It’s all so clear! Moving along:
Materialists/naturalists/evolutionists [sic] insist that something which cannot be observed or tested according to scientific principles (i.e. God) cannot be considered in the world of science. Yet they expect us to believe in key points of their theory (something from nothing, life from lifelessness, information without intelligence) when these contentions have not been observed or verified in science?
So, as we understand Ellis’ position, evolution and creationism are both ridiculous — therefore we should go with creationism. Okay. Click over there to read it all, if you like. We’ve given you enough encouragement.
Copyright © 2009. The Sensuous Curmudgeon. All rights reserved.