Replies to post #137756 on Zeev's Turnips Talk Politics (ZTTP)

[harrypothead]

Mlsoft, Again, it would seem that your interpretation of what constitutes "religion" is too narrowly defined. There are large, well established, organized religious movements, "Bible believing" movements, that place the highest value on the "well informed," well intentioned conscience when faced with moral decision making. And these organized religious movements have used study and evaluation of Scripture to arrive at conclusions regarding the value of human conscience. Thus the term "let your conscience be your guide" is derived. We may not agree with another's interpretation, but we must respect it, especially in the US.

[ergo sum]

Evolution is a theory. Nothing in science is a fact. You can't seem to grasp this basic concept. Evolution is a working hypothesis. Nothing about evolutionary theory suggests that there is a hierarchical purpose. That is a question for philosophy and religion to answer. Science at this time can not answer it.

The most important concept in evolutionary theory is natural selection. This concept has proven to be extremely useful, especially in genetic research. The science that has grown out of this concept is exactly the same science that is used to understand things like avian flu.

The real danger in the creationist movement is that it is not based in science. It is based in religion. The burden of proof is not on the evolutionists it is on the creationists. We need something less abstract and metaphysical than sin as an explanation of avian flu. We need proof of your timeline that is based not simply on a denial of carbon dating. We need something more sophisticated than the Doctrine of Signatures as a modern explanation of life.

As far as I am concerned, historically, the so called Dark Ages are a concept of the 19th century used to explain the aesthetic ideals of people like Ruskin. A useful concept that defines something that never existed.