Lodinews.com

default avatar
Welcome to the site! Login or Signup below.
|
||
Logout|My Dashboard

Letter: Evolutionism is a hypothesis, not a theory

Print
Font Size:
Default font size
Larger font size

Posted: Saturday, August 30, 2014 12:00 am

With reference to Matt Wilson’s letter of Aug. 14, “Science is a process used to decipher the natural world” and Tom Baker’s letter of July 31, “Darwin’s theory has never been proven as truth,” terms must be defined.

The definition of science is a state or fact of knowledge opposed to intuition or belief, a study by exact observation, measurement and reproduction of findings and the establishment and systemization of facts, principles and methods of study.

Based on the definition, evolutionism is a hypothesis, not a theory. It is founded on intuition and imagination, cannot be measured, observed or reproduced in a lab, and certainly assumes and implies more support evidence than actually exists. Evolutionism ranks with nationalism as a false religion, and all of its assumptions can make a fool of you and me — and regularly do. A hypothesis is an unproved, unsubstantiated theory that is a basis for further investigation and study, but not a finding in fact.

Evolutionism is a pretense that’s been accepted as absolute, teachable truth by most of the elite educational community. It has become the foundation for all the sciences in our secular school system, including our prestigious colleges and universities. This intelligentsia tries desperately to silence creationists and exclude creationism from the debate, even to the point of punishing teachers and professors who don’t agree with them. My dear old dad used to say, “All the Ph.D.s, Th.D.’s and fiddle dee-dees behind my name I might earn, can’t beat common sense.”

Technology has certainly expanded our perspective — the Hubble telescope has allowed us to see the unmistakable demonstration of a supreme purpose, plan and design of a pre-eternal, self-existent Creator as well as our own finite, limited understanding of things. Like the old man said, “For all we know, it ain’t much.” Common sense isn’t so common anymore.

William Van Amber Fields

Morada

Rules of Conduct

  • 1 Use your real name. You must register with your full first and last name before you can comment. (And don’t pretend you’re someone else.)
  • 2 Keep it clean. Please avoid obscene, vulgar, lewd, racist or sexually oriented language.
  • 3 Don’t threaten. Threats of harming another person will not be tolerated.
  • 4 Be truthful. Don't lie about anyone or anything. Don't post unsubstantiated allegations, rumors or gossip that could harm the reputation of a person, company or organization.
  • 5 Be nice. No racism, sexism or any sort of -ism that is degrading to another person.
  • 6 Stay on topic. Make sure your comments are about the story. Don’t insult each other.
  • 7 Tell us if the discussion is getting out of hand. Use the ‘Report’ link on each comment to let us know of abusive posts.
  • 8 Share what you know, and ask about what you don't.
  • 9 Don’t be a troll.
  • 10 Don’t reveal personal information about other commenters. You may reveal your own personal information, but we advise you not to do so.
  • 11 We reserve the right, at our discretion, to monitor, delete or choose not to post any comment. This may include removing or monitoring posts that we believe violate the spirit or letter of these rules, or that we otherwise determine at our discretion needs to be monitored, not posted, or deleted.

Welcome to the discussion.

44 comments:

  • Steve Schmidt posted at 3:38 pm on Sat, Sep 13, 2014.

    Steve Schmidt Posts: 2570

    M Doyle, I think you misunderstood me (or, perhaps I was unclear). What I meant was that what belonged in the Halls of Academia was science, not that science should be confined to those hallowed halls.

     
  • M. Doyle posted at 3:08 pm on Fri, Sep 12, 2014.

    M Doyle Posts: 167

    Lots of confirmation bias.

    The place of science is in the halls of academia??? You don't want science in your doctor's office, the hospital, your car, your phone, that computer right in front of you, the medicines you take, the testing that keeps our water safe to drink and our food safe to eat? Science is all around us. Backpackers far from civilization have water purifiers and carbon fiber hiking poles. The clothing and shoes you wear were created using science. You trust science for a hundred things you do in the average day. Even in your temple or church, science is there. The lighting, the sound system, the plastic communion cups, the electric wheelchairs, the high blood pressure pills and inhalers in pockets and purses. I think you want science in your church, don't you? What you don't want in your church is an acknowledgement of science. You want to be able to suspend scientific thinking when you walk in that door.

     
  • Christina Welch posted at 7:19 am on Wed, Sep 10, 2014.

    Christina Welch Posts: 423

    [thumbup] Steve. I couldn't have said it better myself. And, goodness knows I tried [wink]

     
  • Kevin Paglia posted at 4:56 pm on Mon, Sep 8, 2014.

    Kevin Paglia Posts: 2048

    Thank you Steve.

     
  • Steve Schmidt posted at 12:37 pm on Mon, Sep 8, 2014.

    Steve Schmidt Posts: 2570

    Kevin, I guess I missed the preliminaries but you have always struck me as someone who sails on a fairly even keel even if you do like to occasionally advocate for the Devil.

    That said, I too think that there is a place for Spirituality and a place for Science. Of course, to my mind, the place for spirituality is in the Churches, Temples, and Mosques while the place for Science is in the Halls of Academia. Faith, by its very nature, does not need the proof of Science and Science, by definition, does not encompass Faith.

     
  • Jien Kaur posted at 12:24 pm on Mon, Sep 8, 2014.

    Jien Kaur Posts: 246

    To mr Schmidt

    Many culture and religion around this world have the creation story and the United States is special in this because the people who are of the believe in creation use it to make the discrimination of the blacks and native peoples and as many other as they could try to include. Some of the religious (Christians) of the 1800s say the white man was one creation and all other was another creation for god to make the inferiors and slaves.

    As you say 'creationists and their political toadies'. Or reverse in my example - politician and they creationist toadies.

    Thank you - I like this new word for my vocabulary!

     
  • Jien Kaur posted at 12:20 pm on Mon, Sep 8, 2014.

    Jien Kaur Posts: 246

    The television is for the entertainment and not necessary for the fact with the type of show you describe.

     
  • Kevin Paglia posted at 11:54 am on Mon, Sep 8, 2014.

    Kevin Paglia Posts: 2048

    I am curious if any of the ones on here saying they have an open/scientific mind ever watch any of the host of paranormal/myth hunting type shows? And if so, do they automatically assume every single person is lying on them.

     
  • Kevin Paglia posted at 11:20 am on Mon, Sep 8, 2014.

    Kevin Paglia Posts: 2048

    Actually Steve what started all this was when I said I see value in Spirituality AND science.

    And that was blasphemous (excuse the ironic word choice) to the science devotees who were highly offended that i could be both Christian AND like science.

    After that the conversation over several letter erupted into insulting my faith, my experiences and anyone who dared not bow down and worship the almighty Hubble as the great seer (sarcasm at the end there)

     
  • Steve Schmidt posted at 6:04 am on Mon, Sep 8, 2014.

    Steve Schmidt Posts: 2570

    I may be off base here but I don't believe that Mr Paglia is particularly religious. He doesn't seem to be defending Creationism here so much as the Creationists and their political toadies.

     
  • Rick Houdack posted at 8:32 am on Sun, Sep 7, 2014.

    Rick Houdack Posts: 177

    ...and this is about the time when, if we were talking over drinks, you would jump to your feet, throw your drink in my face and kick your chair over before you stormed away yelling toward the sky and waving your arms.

    Do you really want to talk about morality systems (or morale, if you would prefer), Kevin? Have you given any thought at all to your sacred, sacred biblical moral standards? Would this be an inconvenient time to remind you of your pretense of abhorrence of double standards?

     
  • Jien Kaur posted at 9:58 pm on Sat, Sep 6, 2014.

    Jien Kaur Posts: 246

    Tomorrow is Sunday - a day for the religious like the mr Paglia to reflect on the meaning of words and not allow him self to keep pointing the finger of the one who is wronged. There is no hate in the words of the mr Houdack or the mr Doyle - just disagree with what the mr Paglia believe. I feel very very much the hate and anger of the mr Paglia comments. Maybe a good idea to meditate and think how to behave with less of the hate and anger. No need for the mr Paglia to go upset about this comments - but look within for the reasons why he need to be too much the defensive and prove........what? If one has the confidence of the self then no need for the upset.

     
  • M. Doyle posted at 3:33 pm on Sat, Sep 6, 2014.

    M Doyle Posts: 167

    Kevin, I am assuming that your statement below about "you progressives" would include many of those who post here. We are tolerant; let me explain.

    As a rule, the freethinker community feels that belief in mythology, supernatural beings, and especially religious fundamentalism to be destructive to individuals and society. Whenever reason and/or empathy for others are suspended for obedience to dogma and fantasy, people suffer and human progress is stifled. And yet, although we feel this way, we respect your right to think or believe anything you want and would be the first to protest should your civil rights be abridged; if you lose your rights, then ours can not be safe either. There is no atheist call for death to Christians, an outlawing of churches, or discrimination against the faithful. None. We wished that the faithful felt the same about others who are different. It would be wonderful if evangelicals would quit calling for the death of gays and get out of the way of their right to live their lives the way they chose, legally married to the person they love. It would be great if the religious would stop advocating for policies which negatively impact women's health. It would be helpful if true believers would cease trying to impose their puerile attitudes on the entire population. Society would benefit if Gods Gentle People would end their war on science. That would be tolerance.

     
  • M. Doyle posted at 3:15 pm on Sat, Sep 6, 2014.

    M Doyle Posts: 167

    [thumbup]
    Agreed. People deserve respect. Crazy ideas do not.

     
  • Kevin Paglia posted at 12:16 pm on Sat, Sep 6, 2014.

    Kevin Paglia Posts: 2048

    "I will continue to mock your claims and call them frauds and they deserve no respect."

    Thank you for clearly and precisely describing the level of hate you have for people that have different beliefs than you,

    I guess being an internet bully is within your moral code. Could explain why you HOPE there is no final judgement.

     
  • Kevin Paglia posted at 12:10 pm on Sat, Sep 6, 2014.

    Kevin Paglia Posts: 2048

    "You may notice I said “don’t like your beliefs laughed at”, I didn’t say “If you don’t like being laughed at.” The two are different, but the difference may be too subtle for you to see through the red"

    Yet when we Christians use the "LOVE the sinner, hate the sin" line we are met with how stupid it is because actions make the person.

    I know it is hard when your Liberal double standards are turned back on you. Maybe you should examine WHY you support such a morale system that allows you to attack people for what you and your ilk do themselves.

     
  • Rick Houdack posted at 9:05 pm on Fri, Sep 5, 2014.

    Rick Houdack Posts: 177

    I suspect this will have no effect on you Kevin, because when you get like this you stop conversing and are only lashing out. In your rush to get into your oppressed martyr costume, you sometimes put a leg through the neck hole and your head gets stuck in a sleeve.

    You may notice I said “don’t like your beliefs laughed at”, I didn’t say “If you don’t like being laughed at.” The two are different, but the difference may be too subtle for you to see through the red.

    People deserve tolerance, yes; but crazy, mixed-up ideas do not. If fantasies and waking-dreams do not square with reality, then other people are free to call attention to it, just as you presumably would if you saw a child preparing to jump from a roof with a tablecloth tied around his neck as a parachute, despite the child’s insistence he will glide to safety. Bad ideas deserve no respect and it is no sin to point them out.
    In the past couple of weeks you have made truly monumental claims of having magic thinking powers that caused reality to change for you, of demons and other-worldly leprechauns and those silly beliefs simply deserve no respect. They are laughable, but like someone who refuses to admit there is no Santa Claus, for some reason you cannot let go of them. Instead, because you want so desperately for them to be true, you elaborate, making limitless excuses for them. You make apologies for their impossibilities and shortcomings. You fill in the blanks and add even more fantastic, implausible “missing information” to make it logically possible in your mind. You reject actual facts to avoid acknowledging the myths are what they are and then you disingenuously claim to like science.

    You can continue to insist the great magic genie conjured everything in the ever-expanding universe in six days, and that he did it all in crazy, mixed-up order just like it says in the bible. You can keep believing the bible is true because god wrote every word in it and that’s why it is true, even the parts you cannot bring yourself to acknowledge aloud. You can believe god made it rain 40 days and nights and had a 1,000 year old man hammer together a wooden boat with no nails for all the animals and that’s why Darwin is wrong and whatever else. You can believe the genie needs the pope and Pat Robertson and Rick Warren to speak for him and dictate his new revelations (and collect money, too, because god needs cash).

    You are free to make fun of my silly beliefs in research and reality, I will continue to mock your claims and call them frauds and they deserve no respect. But you are in good company with the other theologians Frank Nolton, Van Amber Fields, Ron Arthur, Jerome K., Michael Netterton, etc., so don’t think I am picking on just you.

     
  • Jien Kaur posted at 10:31 am on Fri, Sep 5, 2014.

    Jien Kaur Posts: 246

    I just found interesting and humorous quote in my readings today:

    "It was said that when the theory of evolution was first announced it was received by the wife of the Canon of Worcester Cathedral with the remark, 'Descended from the apes! My dear, we will hope it is not true. But if it is, let us pray that it may not become generally known.'"

    source: Ashley Montagu-Anthropologist

     
  • Kevin Paglia posted at 2:55 pm on Thu, Sep 4, 2014.

    Kevin Paglia Posts: 2048

    True, cause we all know that you Progressives who scream for tolerance are only tolerant of people who think like you

     
  • Rick Houdack posted at 6:45 pm on Wed, Sep 3, 2014.

    Rick Houdack Posts: 177

    Kevin, if your people don't like having your beliefs laughed at, you shouldn't believe such funny things.

     
  • Kevin Paglia posted at 12:43 pm on Wed, Sep 3, 2014.

    Kevin Paglia Posts: 2048

    I these letters stopped coming then WHO would you spend your days mocking and making fun of?

     
  • Jien Kaur posted at 10:18 am on Wed, Sep 3, 2014.

    Jien Kaur Posts: 246

    Mr Schimdt - I have to look up meaning of this "ism" - "ism" is a suffix , meaning adherence or following an ideology."

    Interpret as the mr Amber Fields say that the "believe" in evolution is ideology or as he say "false religion" there fore is bad and against his god.

    To me just play of the language to insult who believe the evolution theory.

     
  • Thomas Heuer posted at 8:49 am on Wed, Sep 3, 2014.

    nth degree wise Posts: 1587

    Forget it Rick
    They can't and never will be able to. Its all in the head.

     
  • Rick Houdack posted at 7:07 pm on Tue, Sep 2, 2014.

    Rick Houdack Posts: 177

    When will one of these lte authors provide proof for their magical, miraculous claims?

     
  • Jien Kaur posted at 11:44 am on Tue, Sep 2, 2014.

    Jien Kaur Posts: 246

    I agree with you this time mr Ed.

     
  • Thomas Heuer posted at 10:16 am on Tue, Sep 2, 2014.

    nth degree wise Posts: 1587

    Walters
    I believe that Mr Fields letter was not put into the religious section because he was responding to letters previously posted in this section. I shared your concern. Now questions could be raised as to why the other letters were in this section to begin with. I could only hazard a guess that the topic of evolution was seen as scientific rather than religious. A short sited assumption on somebody's part.

     
  • Steve Schmidt posted at 9:43 am on Tue, Sep 2, 2014.

    Steve Schmidt Posts: 2570

    Ed hit the nail on the head. Its all about having the right tool for the right job. If you are looking for someone to speak in tongues or roll around on the floor with a bunch of snakes, perhaps an evangelical minister is the right man for the job. IF, however, you are looking for someone to train the next generation of scientists and doctors, someone with a PhD in Biology or Medicine might be a better choice for the job.

    "Witticisms" passed down from father and son are all fine and well but, when you are trying to find a vaccine for Ebola, a working knowledge of science is a whole lot more useful.

     
  • Ed Walters posted at 7:15 pm on Mon, Sep 1, 2014.

    the old dog Posts: 580

    Kaur, perhaps you are correct, then again perhaps not. Albert Einstein was a genius , never the less perhaps he needed help to tie his shoes. He was outstanding at what he did, so leave it go at that.

     
  • Mike Adams posted at 3:33 pm on Mon, Sep 1, 2014.

    Mike Adams Posts: 1439

    Evolution is a long-time process. Very, very long time. It isn't changing your hair color or learning to speak a different language. Even if you believe in "punctuated evolution" (a sudden change in a species), there are still many generations necessary before any change takes hold in a population. Even then it could be wiped out in a generation or two and lost forever.

    Adaptation to a particular environment is not evolution. Having the ability to adapt to either a particular environment or environmental change is evolution. Human beings haven't evolved or changed much in their short period here. Individuals and groups of individuals have adapted to differing environmental and historical events, but again, it is the ability to adapt, not the adaptation itself.

     
  • Brian Dockter posted at 10:51 am on Mon, Sep 1, 2014.

    Brian Dockter Posts: 2850

    Mr. Fields, Has the thought ever crossed your mind that creationism and evolutionism walk hand in hand? It's rather quite simple. As things evolve thus there is the creation of new things. Think about it.

     
  • Steve Schmidt posted at 6:01 am on Mon, Sep 1, 2014.

    Steve Schmidt Posts: 2570

    Ed, I suspect Mr Amber Fields views the Hubble as a work of Satan.

     
  • Steve Schmidt posted at 7:09 pm on Sun, Aug 31, 2014.

    Steve Schmidt Posts: 2570

    Good post.

     
  • Steve Schmidt posted at 7:09 pm on Sun, Aug 31, 2014.

    Steve Schmidt Posts: 2570

    I don't know what this anything about this "evolutionism" thing that Mr Amber Fields is talking about but it doesn't seem to have much to do with the theory of Evolution. Perhaps Bill should rename it to avoid confusion.

     
  • Steve Schmidt posted at 7:07 pm on Sun, Aug 31, 2014.

    Steve Schmidt Posts: 2570

    Good point Rick. I hadn't given much thought to Mr Amber Fields wordy father. Perhaps he kept a little red book in which he wrote down his witticism as they occurred to him.

     
  • Jien Kaur posted at 4:15 pm on Sun, Aug 31, 2014.

    Jien Kaur Posts: 246

    Mr Ed what you say in the regard to degrees in very correct but there are many with the Phd degree that very smart in their topic of study are but very not so smart with the every day common sensible things.

    I have the communication with old friend who has the Phd in the art history special in religious painting of Italy and has that study for over 50 years. Sadly he has not the sense understand the common life and problems of the world beyond art. This friend have the humor of saying 'I have the more degrees that Fahrenheit but do not expect me to know the weather of tomorrow'.

    I do the agree that the mr Field is disrespect in his opinion of the people who have much education and degrees. It says they have the much concentrate and to persist to get such degrees.

     
  • Brian Dockter posted at 10:34 am on Sun, Aug 31, 2014.

    Brian Dockter Posts: 2850

    Simply put. Evolution is gradual change over a period of time. Humans are evolving. Plants are evolving. Animals are evolving. Relationship with a spouse or friends are evolving. Our government's relationship with other governments is evolving and visa versa. Human's relationship with God is evolving. Evolution is a process of adaption and learning to change as things change around us.

     
  • Bob Dirocco posted at 9:22 am on Sun, Aug 31, 2014.

    Bobinlodi Posts: 16

    Is the "law of gravity", one of the many scientific principle of physics next?

     
  • Sarah Elizabeth Tygert posted at 4:22 pm on Sat, Aug 30, 2014.

    Sarah Tygert Posts: 53

    One can not argue with one who researches in such a way as to back what he/she believes, rather than letting the data speak for itself.

    There is no way OP had any semblance of an open mind while contemplating the subject. There is naught that can shake an unshakeable mind.

     
  • Ed Walters posted at 1:51 pm on Sat, Aug 30, 2014.

    the old dog Posts: 580

    First and foremost, anything that Mr. Bill and others submit should be put into the religion section, if it were no one would read it. He in his own way seems to make a joke of having a Ph.D, I do not believe he knows how difficult it is to obtain one, being very smart for openers. First there is a bachelor's, then a masters degree and after many years of study a PhD. , which takes years and money to obtain. The Hubble telescope has allowed us to take a peek into what is not known in deep space itself. One must remember that anything that shines are suns and stars, planets do not emit light. Space goes well into infinity with billions and trillions of stars, and from what has been said by his Dear Old Dad, makes me wonder if daddy had a high school diploma . Simon, put any and all subjects dealing with religion in the religion section of the paper, that way no one will have anything to argue about since no one ever reads it as it just takes up space, it does however make a few sky pilots happy. Concerning church , going there week after week and listen to someone re arrange a sermon that was said the week before would get rather boring, you only have so much material to work with, leave a section open for a good blues band, I`ll show up, perhaps a higher power loved the blues as much as I do. [wink]

     
  • Mike Adams posted at 12:30 pm on Sat, Aug 30, 2014.

    Mike Adams Posts: 1439

    So "Creationism" is a law?

    Where is the irrefutable evidence that proves Creationism is always true?

    Evolution is a theory, not a hypothesis. All the physical and observable data to date shows a continual move to more complexity. We may place some data incorrectly, but as new information comes to light, that data gets moved to a more appropriate location in the puzzle and reinforces the original theory. It doesn't disprove it.

     
  • Thomas Heuer posted at 10:16 am on Sat, Aug 30, 2014.

    nth degree wise Posts: 1587

    I don't know why Mr Van Amber Fields continues to display his lack of knowledge on things outside the bible while attempting to sound knowledgeable on things of science. He defined science but failed to look up the definitions of hypothesis and theory. He simply launched from the definition of science that evolution is derived from non science ie. "intuition and imagination". He makes the same mistake as others that evolution is some kind of stand alone proposition that will fall from lack of evidence or popularity.

    Evolution is hardly a theory anymore let alone a hypothesis. The numerous facts that go toward compiling the "theory" is hardly speculative or guess work. And it definitely isn't an "ism" or belief system as many religious minded try to equate it to.

    However he does want you to believe there is some sort of validity to the book of Genesis which requires more than a little imagination. Evolution does have facts and that is why it needs to be taught in schools. Try as you may there are few discernible or coherent facts in Genesis.

     
  • Rick Houdack posted at 9:58 am on Sat, Aug 30, 2014.

    Rick Houdack Posts: 177

    I am often amused by Amber Fields' ability to manufacture some silly homily he then attributes to his father, but I am amazed by his willingness to lie in defense of his chosen fables. I do not expect him to attempt to gain even an elementary school-depth understanding of the theory of evolution, but Amber Fields might reconsider his "crusade" of false witness against it.

     
  • Bob Dirocco posted at 8:45 am on Sat, Aug 30, 2014.

    Bobinlodi Posts: 16

    [thumbup]

    Geez, is this just an attempt to bait another flogging of a dead horse?

     
  • David Diskin posted at 1:13 am on Sat, Aug 30, 2014.

    David Diskin Posts: 184

    [sleeping] Yawn...

     

Recent Comments

Posted Yesterday by roy bitz.

article: Lodi City Council votes to increase ele…

Another three two vote against rate payers. This one is even more upsetting as two of the three voters are lame ducks. Why would they try…

More...

Posted Yesterday by Todd Cronin.

article: Letter: Nurse’s strike is a sham, disgr…

I know EXACTLY who Fielding Mellish is! Love his New Orleans Jazz Band! As for the rest of your post, a thank you to me is in order for us…

More...

Posted Yesterday by Todd Cronin.

article: Letter: Nurse’s strike is a sham, disgr…

WOW eddy Not to hep on the concept of sarcasm and parody are you. And, what is spamful about my post?

More...

Posted Yesterday by Kenneth Huntley.

article: Lodi City Council votes to increase ele…

Isn't it a Conflict of Interest for Larry Hanson as a city council member to vote for anything to do with our city's electricity? I have re…

More...

Posted Yesterday by Jien Kaur.

article: Joe Guzzardi: Is it time for Nancy Pelo…

The downfall of a representative government. Maybe the United States should change to a direct democracy. In the case of San Francisco th…

More...

Video

Popular Stories

Poll

Loading…

Your News

News for the community, by the community.

Featured Events

CREATE AN EVENT

Mailing List

Subscribe to a mailing list to have daily news sent directly to your inbox.

  • Breaking News

    Would you like to receive breaking news alerts? Sign up now!

  • News Updates

    Would you like to receive our daily news headlines? Sign up now!

  • Sports Updates

    Would you like to receive our daily sports headlines? Sign up now!

Manage Your Lists