[Rockhounds] National Academy of Science evolution / creationismbrochure

[J Bryan Kramer]

There are all sorts of proofs of the age of the planet, one of my favorites
is the Oklo reactors:

<http://www.ocrwm.doe.gov/factsheets/doeymp0010.shtml>

The real extremists in the creationism wing deny that the earth is billions
of years old and deny the fossil record for the existence of ancient life.
Those people are impossible to reason with but IMO are a tiny fraction of
Christians in the US.

There are plenty of people who have a rational approach and who believe that
God is Truth and he can never lie. The fossil and isotopic evidence exists
and, barring some very outre explanation, are the proof of the age of the
planet. To believe otherwise would say that you thought God had lied by
placing these proofs before us.

Now the point where people like me differ from the humanist line is that we
believe that while evolution was taking place it was being guided by God.
For those that deny this they are just acting as proponents of their own
religion. There is no proof either way and assuming one or the other way is
true is just a decision based on faith. If the science community just
followed the proper course, that of exploring the mechanisms of evolution or
cosmology then they would eliminate a lot of the conflict. Science is about
HOW and should not be about WHY. Why is theology.

There are plenty of discrepancies in evolution and in cosmology. The
evolution of the eye is, IMO, unexplained since there don't seem to be any
intermediate forms between the simple eye patch and the fully developed eye.
I've seen a number of sarcastic essays written by evolutionists about this
subject but they all seem to be lacking in any sort of proof. They all seem
to take the 'only a moron could say something like that' line but don't
provide any explanation of the 'missing links'.

In cosmology of course the Anthropic question is unanswered:

<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anthropic_principle>

The odds of a randomly selected universe having the precise physical
constants that permit life is something like 1 in 10^50th. A very very small
number. String theory has proposed that there are something like 10^50th
parallel universes and we just happen to live in the one and only one that
supports life. Talk about the universal lottery. Of course string theory is
totally untestable and thus is not science anyway.

But IMO there is no reason to let fanatics on either side influence us. If
we just stick to the hows of why things happen then there is no argument.

BK



So, instead of risking a flame I would wonder how you can dismiss fossil
> records without denying the existence of tectonic plate movement.
> Or do they do that too?
> Tectonics deliver existing proof of the age of our planet, right?
>
> Axel
>


--- StripMime Report -- processed MIME parts ---
multipart/alternative
  text/plain (text body -- kept)
  text/html
---