Ultimately, Rand’s egoism is irreconcilable with both Christianity and capitalism. In fact, since the system fails to have any true explanatory value, it’s difficult to find any reason to adopt Objectivism at all. Fortunately, we don’t have to buy into Rand’s philosophical errors in order to appreciate her fiction. We just have to keep in mind that instead of reading a “novel of ideas”, we are reading a work of fantasy.
Archive for Jesus
From the article:
“By studying ontogeny (the development of embryos), scientists can learn about the evolutionary history of organisms. Ancestral characters are often, but not always, preserved in an organism’s development. For example, both chick and human embryos go through a stage where they have slits and arches in their necks that are identical to the gill slits and gill arches of fish. This observation supports the idea that chicks and humans share a common ancestor with fish. Thus, developmental characters, along with other lines of evidence, can be used for constructing phylogenies.”
The image of a human embryo is shown, with an arrow pointing to one part of the embryo and labeled “gill slits”. Not even, well, anyone, actually believes this anymore (and the article linked above admits this near the end):
“But what about the supposed evidence for gill slits, yolk sac, and tail (to name the most used examples) in a human embryo? True enough, at an early stage of development the human fetus does have certain folds or creases which resemble these found in a fish embryo. As they develop, however, the resemblance stops. In the fish, the folds develop into gills; but in the human, they develop into the glands and structures in the ear and neck areas. If humans were related to fish, one would expect the gills to evolve into the lungs, trachea, and mouth. Similarly, the embryonic human “tail” is in reality the developing coccyx, or “tail bone,” a vitally important, fully human feature, while the so-called yolk sac is not a source of nourishment as in a bird egg, but is the source of the embryo’s first blood cells. Everything about the human embryo is totally unique and human.”
The book is by Neil Shubin, not the review. The review is by Colin Mitchell.
So, one of my former “Facebook Friends” outed himself as a Delusional Darwinoid, by posting and recommending an article that makes the assertion that arguing for Young Earth Creationism will most likely drive Christians from the faith. Because, you know, in order to keep people believing the Bible, one must assuredly rip out huge chunks of the Bible that do not comport with modern materialistic, naturalistic assumptions concerning the natural world.
The article centered on the new Ray Comfort video called “Evolution versus God”. The article’s author admitted that he only watched the first five minutes of the video, because he couldn’t stand to have his faith in materialistic, naturalistic pseudo-science challenged (well, that’s not what he really said, but that’s what happened). So, this article’s author, along with my former “Facebook Friend”, and several others, joined the community of dunces nodding sagely and expounding on how super-duper smart they were for believing pseudo-scientific flapdoodle, and what a bunch of liars us Creationists are. He also said more than once that I didn’t really understand the theory, and that I should educate myself. I get that a lot. Funny that no one is willing to answer my questions, though, to ensure my enlightenment.
For example, I asked this fellow (the “FB Friend”) what observed evidence we have that amphibians evolved from fish. He equivocated and dodged and ignored, naturally, because no such evidence exists. He did make the spurious claim that “macroevolution” (that is, molecules-to-man evolution) is the result of accumulated adaptations that we actually observe within a species. The claim is, of course, nonsense; no one has observed an accumulation of “microevolutionary changes” to its fulfillment in a change in “kind” (sort of like our modern “class”, or possibly “order”). No, “macroevolution” is both an unobserved and unobservable phenomenon. Even the True Believers in Evolution will (grudgingly) admit this; after all, evolution just “takes too long” to have actual observations of it occurring. So, the Delusional Darwinists must rely on extrapolation and hypothesis to tie, say, the T-Rex to the modern chicken.
Speaking of which, the article’s author jumped in, and said that we were on the verge of changing a chicken (which, he claimed, was really a dinosaur) into a dinosaur. He admitted that there was no real evidence supporting the Evolutionary Hypothesis that anyone besides a Delusional Darwinoid would find persuasive. In his article, he said that he nearly abandoned the faith because a group of Christian friends told him that he couldn’t believe in Jesus and the Evolutionary Hypothesis. It is a nonsensical claim, of course; many true believers maintain a preposterous belief in Darwin’s pseudo-science. However, it is interesting that if forced to choose between Jesus and “science”, the author would abandon Jesus. Freaky.
Theologically speaking, it is the Delusional Darwinoid Christians who truly threaten the faith of other Christians, for they teach that man’s fallible ideas are superior to the Word of God. They make God out to be a kind of liar, claiming that He “dumbed down” the creation story so that the “ignorant and backward” people of the Bronze Age could understand it. Nevermind that the Bronze Age people probably had a much greater intellectual capacity, on average, than modern man. They also believe, apparently, that millions of years of death and suffering preceded mankind…who is to blame for death and suffering due to his rebellion. As a new “Facebook Friend” of mine pointed out in a Youtube video he made: “Every major doctrine of Christianity is based on the first eleven chapters of the book of Genesis.” Excellent point, my friend.
Nye also responded to me trying to discredit the definition of historical science by saying that he believed in the Civil War, Newton, and Galileo even though he wasn’t there to observe them. I didn’t get to respond because we were out of time. Here’s what I would have said: “How do you know about the Civil War, Newton, and Galileo? You depend on eyewitness accounts of the people themselves or people who witnessed the events to help you know the truth about the past. So why not do the same when it comes to earth’s history and believe in the eyewitness account of the Creator God written for us in Scripture? In the scheme of billions of years of the earth’s and universe’s history, there were no modern humans on the scene until a couple hundred thousand years ago. You need to realize that everything you think about most of this history is based on nothing more than unverifiable assumptions and imagination and not eyewitness accounts.”