Posted By saintbenaiah

This is not a political blog, though I will sometimes venture into that area when the subject matter overlaps with Christian apologetics and Christian worldview issues.  This past week that seems to have occurred. 

Rick Perry was the target of a liberal snare.  A Mom--I don't know whether she was working alone or was with the group that was sent to heckle him--used her son to try and provoke Perry into saying something that would slow his momentum, or, ideally, completely derail his presidential campaign.  The mother, through her young son, asked Perry how old the earth was.  Perry answered that he did not know but that it was very old.  This was a political answer, but technically it was true.  None of us know exactly how old the earth is (though we have pretty good idea) and it is very old (6,000 years is pretty old to me).  But this did not satisfy the Mom because she was out to cause trouble for the governor. 

So she asked a second question about evolution.  Perry, by this time, obviously understood what was going on here, so he very deftly bent down to the level of the boy and told him that in Texas they taught both evolution and creation so that individuals could draw their own conclusions.  For this young child, this should have presented a pretty stark contrast between the two, Rick Perry and his Mom.  She was hiding behind her son, projecting her issue onto him, while Perry spoke on the young man's level inspiring him to be free to make up his own mind on the matter after examining all the evidence. 

Obviously, the mother saw her designs backfiring on her and she tried to take one last emotional shot:  "Ask him why he doesn't believe in science."  This probably made her feel good, or at least feel better, since her first attempts were thwarted, but it betrays her ignorance of the issues.  Perry, however, recognizing his victory and the futility of further discussion, strode away to greet the rest of the crowd.  

To the liberal "mind", evolution is science.  However, darwinian evolution does not even begin the to meet the rigid requirements of being observable, testable, and repeatable.  In fact, evolution requires that science be discarded.  In order to believe this humanistic evolutionary scenario, we must first believe that something came from nothing and then we must believe that well established laws of thermodynamics, laws by the way that are observable, testable, and repeatable are violated by order being introduced into a closed system. 

The purpose of this post is not to argue against evolution, however, it is to draw attention to the attitudes of many in our culture toward those who espouse a Christian worldview.  These are considered "unscientiic."  They are considered dangerous. In a similar manner, Michelle Bachmann, has been branded by the liberal Huffpost as "controversial" simply because she professes Christianity.  

While I do not share either Bachmann or Perry's particular theology, it is certainly sad that this country, founded on Judeao-Christian values, has now been so taken over by the left that politicians who espouse these ancient values are vilified by the public media.  We applaud Mr. Perry, not only for his deft handling of this situation but also in taking a public stand for the truth.

Eric L. Padgett


 
1 Comment(s):
Adelphos said...
The mother who cowardly confronted Governor Perry from behind her own son asked Perry "why he doesn't believe in science" revealed quite a lot about herself. First, notice she asked why Perry didn't "believe" in science. Clearly, she has a "belief" which she expects others (Perry, etc.) to embrace. A "religion" if you will. The very thing she apparently and erroneously accuses Perry of doing even though Perry said he prefers all views to be presented and let the hearers decide what is true. In fact, the Texas law does indeed allow, not require, criticism of any (so-called) scientific view. Look it up. But that is what liberals do. They hate and accuse those who disagree with them of committing what in fact THEY do! That said, consider the context: the woman had her son to previously ask how old the earth is. What this woman actually wanted to do is, make anyone who rejected evolution or global warming, or even had legitimate questions about their veracity, as being ignorant, religious zealots, devoid of any scientific or intellectual capacity. In short, idiots. However, she is devoid of reasoning. She equates "evolution" with "science." But I could equally heckle her why she didn't "believe" in baseball simply because she rejected the idea that hotdogs taste good! The former has no causal connection to the latter, even though many hotdogs are found at baseball games. Just because some evolutionist claims "evoluton" is "science" does not make the claim true. This woman, like so many other non-thinking people in the world merely accept false claims of others merely because of their "credentials" (credibility) because they are "scientists." Remember not so long ago when "scientist" said coffee and peanut butter may cause cancer? Then not mere weeks later they said they "now know" that they do not cause cancer? And in the case of coffee went so far as to say it may even inhibit cancer! They either knew it did or it didn't, but they cannot know both views when they contradict. They just didn't "know" even while making the claim they did! If scientists are the only keepers of knowledge (remember, science, from the Latin scentia, means knowledge), then my friends, we are are in deep trouble! Think for yourselves! The term "science" is so abused by those who control its usage--the scientists and evolutionists. When they say "science," they imply "empiricism" (what we can see, hear, taste, touch and smell) and the Scientific Method (observed phenomenon, repeatability of phenomenon, measurability of phenomenon, and predictability of phenomenon). But they use the term loosely when their hobby of "evolution" (especially macro-evolution)is the topic of discussion. They even deceive people with arguments like: "evolution" is a theory just like the "theory of gravitation." Gravity is demonstrable. Evolution is not! Evolution does not meet the requirements of the Scientific Method. No one, not even a "scientist" has ever observed evolution. How can they? By their own admission, it takes millions, even billions of years to occur! So observation is out. But, if you have never seen it occur, how do you repeat the event? You don't even know what it looks like, how it operates, its processes or what it produces! So, how then do you measure something you've never seen or have no knowledge of what it looks like or produces? You can't. And you certainly cannot predict what it's result would be. That woman, and anyone else, can "believe" in evolution if she wants. They can "believe" they can flap their arms and fly if they want. Just don't take my tax dollars to fund and force me and others to "believe" in your religion and worship at the altar of humanistic materialism. I'd rather use reason and generations of experiential evidence(empiricism) which teaches us that evolution has not occurred. Why "believe" the fairy tale of evolution when "science" (empiricism) teaches you the truth!
August 21, 2011 02:15:31
 
Leave a Comment:
Name: * Email: *
Home Page URL:
Comment: *
   char left.

re-generate
Enter the text shown in the image on the left: *
 Remember Me?
* fields are requried
    


 
Google

User Profile
saintbenaiah
saintbenaiah@Christianapologi...

 
Category
 
Recent Entries
 
Archives
 
Links
 
Latest Comments
 
Navigation