My Photo

About Me

« My Favorite Albums of 2007 | Main | Dwell Urban Church Planting Conference »

January 24, 2008



How did life and the universe come to be? An honest scientist must candidly admit that science has not yet been able to answer this question definitively.

A variety of natural theories of origins have been proposed. A scientist’s professional integrity requires that he or she critically examine each theory and point out areas where it falls short of providing a full and adequate explanation of the empirical data.

What evolutionists do not like – what some find intolerable – is that a critical examination of natural explanations and their shortcomings inevitably leads people to consider the possibility of supernatural explanations. Evolutionists have decided for themselves (and hold it as one of their most basic core beliefs) that they will not acknowledge even the possibility of an unseen being that possesses the power to design and manufacture the universe and its living beings. They personally refuse to accept the idea of a living God.

It is, of course, their right to make this choice for themselves. The problem enters when they seek to impose their personal choice on others whose minds are still open to all possibilities. Their personal animosity toward the idea of a supernatural explanation of origins causes them to be less than honest in their teaching of science and in their treatment of others who do not share that animosity.

In their teaching they feel compelled to insist that some natural explanation provides a good and satisfactory explanation of origins when in fact every natural explanation that has been offered to date contains serious problems which an honest scientist should probably label fatal flaws. But rather than call attention to those flaws they become willing participants in a conspiracy of silence. They skew their teaching with a view toward hiding the truth.

And if any brave soul has the professional integrity to refuse to be a part of that conspiracy, he or she is professionally crucified, in spite of whatever positive contributions he or she may have made to the advancement of true science.

When the forces of the state and the scientific establishment are arrayed behind one theory in such a way as to squelch all legitimate criticism of it, true scientists must object. When scientists are not allowed to criticize a prevailing theory and propose alternatives, true science does not advance. Science advances when all theories are presented and considered in light of the empirical evidence.

The comments to this entry are closed.