I break down evolution into microevolution, which has been observed through the scientific method, and macroevolotion, which is nothing but inference (whether or not you think there is good support for it is your opinion, but you have to admit it is inference).
Why do some evolutionists fly off the handle and claim that creationism is an attack on science? I don't know any creationists that are refuting science; in fact they have a lot of respect for validated science. They are refuting macroevolution alone. Yet some evolutionists choose to hide behind the broad category of science to distort the image of creationists. Why would someone with confidence need to do this?
And what benefit is macroevolution to science anyhow? Other than an explanation of where we came from, it offers nothing for today or the far future. Seems like a lot of fuss to protect a theory that offers nothing. Maybe there's more to it than just science?
Power? Ideology? Faith? Fear?
2007-05-28
02:08:32
·
21 answers
·
asked by
Jdude
2
in
Philosophy