Doug Kanter wrote:

...........
I'm busy, so perhaps I'm not seeing all the possibilities, but at the
moment, I can only see two possible ways evolution and creation are NOT
mutually exclusive:

1) You believe each so-called "day" of creation actually represents
millions or billions of years. (I've heard this from a few saps).

2) You think carbon dating is junk science.

............


From AxisofLogic.com

Science/Nature
"Evolution is a Theory, not a Fact" -- Making No Sense in Defense of
Nonsense
By Dr. Gerry Lower
Nov 14, 2004, 09:20

In the year of our Lord, 2002, during the "compassionate" conservative
tenure of George W. Bush, Cobb County school officials in Atlanta, Georgia
were so emboldened as to put "warning stickers" in biology textbooks.
Literally thousands of parents had complained that the textbooks presented
evolution as if it were a "fact," without even mentioning Old Testament
explanations for the origins of life, specifically creationism and
"intelligent design."

As a quick way to ruin a good book, the warning stickers have since been
challenged in court as an unlawful imposition by and promotion of religion
- in a nation ostensibly based on the separation of church and state. With
the ascendency of religion-based capitalism in the U.S., however, this case
is but one of several that have been considered in recent years, all of
which revolve around the proper teaching of human origins in science
education (Chicago Tribune, November 9, 2004).

The warning stickers read, "This textbook contains material on evolution.
Evolution is a theory, not a fact, regarding the origin of living things."

Creationists are wanting to say here that evolution remains "hypothetical"
and "unproven," but they employ words that they do not comprehend.
Evolutionary theory is not hypothetical at all or it could and would not
constitute a theory. Evolutionary theory does not need to be "proven." It
stands as the only viable, inclusionary approach available. Implicit, of
course, in the creationist's warning is the notion that creationism is
somehow more worthy of belief.

This all makes perfectly good sense to religious fundamentalists because it
seemingly props up the creationist point of view at the expense of the
evolutionary point of view. In other words, in the absence of empirical
fact and logic, creationism utilizes essentially political approaches to
winning arguments. There is little option if one does not know the
difference between a fact and a theory.

From natural philosophical perspectives, the warning does little harm except
in being confusing and divisive to students. It is an argument that makes
no sense in its defense of nonsense. At the same time, the warning does
provide a good deal of insight into the shallow grasp that religious
Americans have of science, natural philosophy and its political philosophy,
Democracy (their chosen political philosophy).

Everyone already agrees, for example, that evolution is a "theory." Like all
good theories, evolution is (by definition) based entirely upon empirical
fact and empirical/logical inference (inductions, deductions and
reductions). As such, all theories transcend the facts because theories
embrace the facts and provide the facts with conceptual context within
which the facts make sense and constitute knowledge.

Without larger theoretical frameworks within which to organize, prioritize
and integrate the facts as ideas, we would live (as we do under religious
capitalism) in a complex world of competing facts, no larger knowledge
available. This is exemplified by current marketplace-driven approaches to
national cancer policy which have created crises in medical research,
practice and ethics (Cancer, Capitalism and Intellectual Corruption,
axisoflogic.com, October, 2004).

To its credit, creationism does not even pretend to be based on empirical
fact and logic. For that reason alone, it deserves no entrance into the
realm of natural philosophical discourse, because it does not know what the
terms mean and it cannot follow established rules, at least not if it hopes
to win an argument.

Creationism must stand in defense of ancient western superstition and
supernaturalism and, in doing so, it must throw fact and logic out. As
such, creationism's world view does not even qualify as a hypothesis,
because even hypotheses are properly based upon empirical facts, even if
those facts do not yet provide the basis for a compelling theory.

Evolution is a theory comprised of myriad facts from the informational,
molecular, cellular, organismal and populational levels of organization.
These hierarchical and interrelated facts are integrated into definable
conceptual frameworks over historical and evolutionary time frames to
provide an internally-consistent view of the whole, i.e., a theory.

Evolutionary theory has long stood as "proven" simply because it provides
the only viable frameworks for continued comprehension of human comings and
goings. In other words, evolutionary theory is no longer in competition
with religious explanations of human origins, no more than the Germ Theory
of infectious disease is in competition with religious explanations of
disease causation (as punishment from the creationist's god.

Evolutionary theory simply provides the best, most human, most broadly
applicable explanation for human origins currently available. As a good
theory, evolution provides common human ground relevant to all people and
relevant to human self-concept. As a good theory, evolution provides not
only explanatory value relevant to comprehension but also operational value
relevant to control.

Legal council for the Atlanta school district said that the "warning"
stickers on biology textbooks were meant to "encourage critical thinking."
This again is an argument that makes no sense in defense of nonsense.
Critical thinking requires, after all, knowing something about the
relationships between ideas, facts, hypotheses and theories. Critical
thinking requires, after all, knowing something about natural philosophy
and its historic American role in overcoming religious despotism two
centuries ago.

There is and can be no intelligent or meaningful compromise between science
and religion on this issue. As with arguments over the motions of the
planets and the causes of human disease, ultimately one side will be
accepted, i.e., "proven," and one side will be rejected as being inadequate
to the job at hand. Creationism will be kindly requested to take its
religion back home where it belonged all along in a democracy guaranteeing
religious freedom. Its very presence in governmental and academic
deliberations is an affront to the separation of church and state.

After all the idle debate, it comes down to a matter of human self-concept.
The real issue here is whether we, as a people, ought base our views of
life on supernatural conjecture (to become transcendentalists,
supernaturalists and self-righteous fundamentalists) or on empirical
reality (to become empiricists, realists, and thoughtful, caring,
responsible citizens). In the end, the choice is ours, to have a view of
life based on faith in faith itself or a view of life based on what we know
and what we care about.

Empiricists see creationists as being challenged when it comes to logic
(which they are) while creationists see empiricists as being challenged
when it comes to faith (which they are not). Empiricism just happens to
better know where to place its faith, in the human mind and in humankind to
ultimately achieve maturation and self-comprehension in the honest human
truth.

This is just the way the world works, just beneath the surface. God is never
apart from honesty and human truth, as God is never a part of dishonesty
and falsehood. The path to human intellectual maturation and
self-comprehension is the path to human spirituality and the God of all
people. Faith in the human truth, faith in the human mind, and faith in
humankind is faith in God.

To claim to be doing the work of God, in spite of global empirical evidence
to the contrary, is religious self-righteousness personified, and that is
all it is. It will ultimately leave one alone with fools for council,
nothing of God in sight. To be honestly human is always to be with God,
whose interest is necessarily restricted to the honest human truth.
Otherwise, don't you see, even God would be lost right along with his
children. Someone has to do the job at the top.

Ferdinand Magellan, as if writing to creationists and fundamentalists, put
it this way. "The church says the earth is flat, but I know that it is
round, for I have seen its shadow on the moon, and I have more faith in a
shadow than in the church" (Magellan witnessing the eclipse of 17 April,
1520).

Samuel Adams, as if writing to creationists and fundamentalists, put it this
way. "If you love wealth better than liberty, the tranquility of servitude
better than the animating contest of freedom, go home from us in peace. We
ask not your counsels or arms. Crouch down and lick the hands which feed
you. May your chains set lightly upon you and may posterity forget that ye
were our countrymen"

"Evolution is a theory, not a fact." So is Democracy a political theory and
not a fact. Rejoice in that, people. It means that you have the right to
change it to fit the facts.

-----------------------

Dr. Gerry Lower lives in the shadow of Mount Rushmore in the Black Hills of
South Dakota. His website can be reached at www.jeffersonseyes.com and he
can be reached at

© Copyright 2004 by AxisofLogic.com