Prepare yourself for a wild ride, dear reader. The Discovery Institute is making a frontal assault on science itself in their newest post. The title is Evolution Confirmed? The Philosophy of Naturalism. It was written by Cornelius Hunter — a Discoveroid “fellow” who teaches at a bible college. Here are some excerpts, with bold font added by us for emphasis:
[B]y wholeheartedly embracing and promoting Theodosius Dobzhansky’s famous phrase, “Nothing in Biology Makes Sense Except in the Light of Evolution,” evolutionists have backed themselves into a corner from which they cannot escape. There is much to say about this evolutionary rallying cry, but at the top of the list is that it is false. Unequivocally false.
BWAHAHAHAHAHA! Isn’t this great? Then he says:
This is not an opinion or a pushback. I’m not trying to pick a debate — because there is no debate. We may as well debate whether bachelors are male. Dobzhansky’s phrase, with all due respect, is “not even wrong,” as physicists like to say. It is silly, and yet there it is — all over the literature. The phrase is approvingly recited even in peer-reviewed technical journal papers. It is the mantra that evolutionists will not stop repeating, all the while revealing that this isn’t about science. Evolutionists will never repeal and recant, because there simply is too much at stake here.
Yes, we’re desperate, so we keep repeating the mantra. After that, Cornelius tells us:
But Dobzhansky’s famous phrase is not the only way evolutionists have self-destructed. [Hee hee!] They have made other nonnegotiable and important claims that are equally corrosive. One is that evolution is both confirmed and required. The National Association of Biology Teachers’ official position statement on the teaching of evolution states that evolution is (i) confirmed by the scientific evidence and (ii) a necessary going-in position in order for science to function properly.
Do you see the problem? This philosophical position that evolutionists have staked themselves to is circular. To understand why, imagine for a moment that you witness a miracle, involving “non-naturalistic or supernatural” causes. According to evolutionists, such an event is “outside the scope of science.”
Foolish evolutionists! They don’t realize that miracles are all around us. Cornelius continues:
Does that imply the event was necessarily not real? No, the fact that something falls outside of one’s definition of science does not rule it out of existence. The event does not automatically become necessarily impossible. Something can be not amenable to scientific investigation yet real.
Right — supernatural events are just as real as natural events! Let’s read on:
So evolutionists have committed themselves to yet another false statement. But that’s not the main problem. The main problem is that if one insists on and is committed to naturalism, then naturalistic, evolutionary, explanations are what you will find. So of course evolution is confirmed by the science. It has to be. For evolutionists, the question is not whether evolution is confirmed by the science, the only question is what are the particulars.
Verily, the circularity is obvious! Another excerpt:
This explains why evolutionists interpret the evidence the way they do. It explains how contradictory evidence can be sustained over and over and over. It also explains why, so long as you stick to naturalism, anything and everything is allowed.
Evidence will be interpreted, filtered, analyzed, and processed according to the rules. Non-cooperative evidence will be set aside and viewed as “grounds for further research.” Or it will be ground up and recast until it can be made to work right. Cooperative evidence, on the other hand, will be viewed as normative, and ready for incorporation into proper scientific theories.
That’s how it’s done! Here’s more
When evolutionists insist that science must be strictly naturalistic they show their hand. The flip side of their claim, that evolution is confirmed, is not a theory-neutral, objective finding. It is driven by the philosophy. It is circular — the conclusion was assumed in the first place.
And now we come to the end:
If your going-in position is that naturalism is required, then your results will adhere to naturalism. Evolution is not a scientific finding. It is a philosophical mandate.
What Cornelius has done here is restate ol’ Hambo’s often repeated doctrine: In Ken Ham: The Battle of Worldviews we quoted him:
It’s a battle between two different worldviews. Students who are committed to the starting point that there is a Creator are going to interpret the evidence in a different manner than their evolutionary or atheistic professors. It’s not religion vs. science — it’s a battle between two different interpretations of the same evidence!
So there you are. Cornelius and the Discoveroids agree with ol’ Hambo. And you have a decision to make, dear reader — between reality and Oogity Boogity! The choice is yours.
Copyright © 2017. The Sensuous Curmudgeon. All rights reserved.