Evilutionist wrote:The only reason evolution has any social impact at all is because people have forced a social perspective on it. One could easily go off the psychological deep-end about QM, Magnetism or Gravity. The main difference is that some humans have trouble accepting the fact that they could have evolved. Why? I've never really understood it, but apparently the notion that God creates via evolution makes people uncomfortable, but the fact that God let's neutrons tunnell randomly out of a nucleus does not cause them angst. Bascially, someone had to teach you that evolution was anti-God and you've accepted that hook, line and sinker.
If my comment concerning the ego of an overeducated professor is an ad hominem so is your statement that someone had to teach me to reject Darwinian evolution, which is actually a false statement. When I look at the complexity of life, let alone the complexity found within the human body I rejected natural selection and the evolution of all life from a common ancestor long before I got involved in this debate.
Since you insist on bringing the physical sciences into this debate and if you will actually think about what you have posted you are in fact making my case. We know gravity and magnetism are real because we experience them daily. However, science classes teach that science cannot fully explain either gravity or magnetism. Yet Darwinian evolution is taught as an indisputable scientific fact. You brought up quantum mechanics, yet not all branches of physics can be reconciled with each other.
It is a tribute to the integrity of the scientific community, that they still honor fact over authority. Literally thousands of micro physicists are lined up on the side of Quantum mechanics, Heisenberg and the overall theories that support the Quantum point of view. Einstein stands alone against the mob in his view of the universe. Yet his view has not been suppressed; it is alive and well. One reason is that the Quantum physicists
feel in their bones that something is wrong with their point of view. The Quantum mechanics view and Einstein's view are incompatible. The two views cannot be merged. They stand in opposition to one another.
If one is right, then the other is wrong. It is that simple. No scientific experiment has been proposed that will resolve the issue, as it is irresolvable.
http://www.newphysics2000.org/einstein.htm
The origins of life as well as the origins of species also has another explanation that is irresolvable – creation vs. Darwinism.
runner wrote:Actually, there is evidence for precursors to the fauna of the Cambrian radiation in all of the Precambrian fossils that we have been dealing with. I don't know where you got this notion that there is no evidence.
The only “evidence” is what you want to believe the fossil record might demonstrate given enough time.
runner wrote:THERE THEY ARE. As to empirical evidence, first there is plenty in the fossil record and second, what is wrong with circumstantial evidence? Do you realize that we convict people in court based on circumstantial evidence? I know that this may not be good enough for you, but for virtually all of the scientific community it is quite sufficient.
Have you seen news reports where convictions have been overturned after real evidence has revealed the “circumstantial evidence” used to convict people has been uncovered?