“Woe to the one who quarrels with his Maker – An earthenware vessel among the vessels of earth! Will the clay say to the potter, ‘What are you doing?’ Or the thing you are making say, ‘He has no hands ‘? “Woe to him who says to a father, ‘What are you begetting?’ Or to a woman, ‘To what are you giving birth?”
“Naturalistic explanations will be discovered in ‘simple, undirected processes that are ‘yet unexplained.” – Behold, the stunning “Evo’ Credo.”
This is evolutionists’ answer promising an answer. Bruce Lee called this “The art of fighting without fighting”, and it’s delivered in a smart package. (“How do you keep a dummy in suspense?’. . .’how do you keep a dummy in suspense?’. . . etc.) This wit only goes so far. If they can’t bring it all together the only option is for something overwhelming to occur: something that vindicates their embattled science, adds perpetuity to the increasingly post-christian consensus, and can proudly stand before this information-jammed population and tie it all together.
Galatians ch.5:vs.1 “For freedom Christ has set us free; stand firm therefore, and do not submit again to the yoke of slavery.” †
The progressive acquiescence of some well-intending christians in combining evolution with God may look like the olive branch for those who desire a quenching bond with the strong-willed disciples of scientism. . . but, even then, you will be mocked for “Coping Out.”as displayed in this quote by Richard Dawkins:
“If God wanted to create life and create humans, it would be slightly odd that he should choose the extraordinarily roundabout way of waiting for 10 billion years before life got started and then waiting for another 4 billion years until you got human beings capable of worshiping and sinning and all the other things religious people are interested in.” – 2006 “God vs. Science, Richard Dawkins and Francis Collins interviewed by D. Cray”
Despite all the false half-concession plays seen from evolutionists, that they’re “not necessarily trying to omit God.”, it’s exactly that. Darwin and his legacy essentially trapped science within an undetermined naturalism philosophy, and progeny to his pseudo-scientific presupposition have infiltrated academia, presuming to dictate what science is.
All flesh is not the same flesh: but there is one kind of flesh of men, another flesh of beasts, another of fishes, and another of birds. – 1st Corinthians ch.15: vs.39
“It’s no use for Darwinists to trot out the standard ‘party line’ that ‘even if we don’t yet understand how it happened, we still have enough evidence to infer that it happened.’ At the very most, all that the current scientific evidence could establish is the common descent of living organisms. But that’s not “macroevolution.” Macroevolution requires more than a common ancestry for living organisms: it requires a natural mechanism which can generate the diversity of life-forms we see on Earth today from a common stock, without the need for any direction by an Intelligent Agent. But the mechanism is precisely what we don’t have evidence for. So the question remains: ‘why should we believe in macroevolution?’
I simply can not accept it as unreservedly as many of my scientist colleagues do, although I sincerely respect them as scientists. Some of them seem to have little trouble embracing many of evolution’s proposals based upon (or in spite of) archeological, mathematical, biochemical and astrophysical suggestions and evidence, and yet few are experts in all of those areas, or even just two of them. Although most scientists leave few stones unturned in their quest to discern mechanisms before wholeheartedly accepting them, when it comes to the often gross extrapolations between observations and conclusions on macroevolution, scientists, it seems to me, permit unhealthy leeway.- Professor James M. Tour – one of the ten most cited chemists in the world: “A world-famous chemist tells the truth: there’s no scientist alive today who understands macroevolution.”
Follow Up By Dr.Vincent Torley
In a part of a follow-up article after accusatory responses: “When Professor Tour publicly declares that no scientist alive today understands the chemical details behind macroevolution, he is not espousing the naïve reductionist line that “explaining macroevolution is a matter of ‘chemistry’”; rather, he is simply pointing out that in order to properly assess the feasibility of Darwinian macroevolution as a theory, we have to ascertain whether it is chemically feasible. If, for some reason, certain macroevolutionary transitions appear to be highly improbable from a chemical standpoint, then that in itself is a good reason to be skeptical of the view that Darwin’s theory of evolution is an all-inclusive theory of biology” – “Macroevolution, Microevolution and Chemistry: The Devil Is In The Details” – Vincent Torley
It’s Become Clear: Explaining Evolution Is Just The Turn, Following The Initial Pledge By Darwin, Past it’s Combined Proponents’ Awareness, To Prep The World Audience For The Prestige.
Evolutionists’ Deity: “E.T.”
We have the Richard Dawkins statement on the Ben Stein video “Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed“: “Well… it could come about in the following way: it could be that uh, at some earlier time somewhere in the universe a civilization evolved… probably by some kind of Darwinian means to a very, very high level of technology and designed a form of life that they seeded onto… perhaps this planet.”
Dr.Dawkins is referring to “Directed Panspermia“: the theory of intentional spreading of seeds of life to other planets by an advanced extraterrestrial civilization. “Making Contact” with the proverbial “aliens” would be celebrated, worldwide. Directed Panspermia theorizing evolutionists would point up and say “I told you, they started all of this, and now their here to help!” The disturbing element here is the obstruction of bigger-picture logic, despite all their intellect; they are conveniently capping-off an endless biological regression, leaving the true origin of life, the transcendent, unexplained. The appearance of other biological organisms, more intelligent or not, cannot explain the ultimate origin of life. Even if they were our estranged “space brothers,” at best that just means we have relatives occupying parts of the cosmos. The level of extravagance invested into evolution, overlorded by Panspermia, simply adds another rung in an endless receding dna spiral without addressing that space, time and all life within this construct had to have a transcendent origin; order “on a knife’s edge” in our constants and quantities (as William Lane Craig stated) by design; a personal, “transcendent mind” is responsible, not merely “the universe” through naturalists’ presuppositions. Remember, Professor Tour explained how evolutionists, even after all this time, resource expenditure and technological applications, cannot explain the naturalistic mechanism they suggest is responsible for macro-evolution: then, they simply exceed their expertise overall mandate to rail “God is a fairy tale,”now suggesting e.t. must be responsible. Then, to whom do they assign credit for E.T. being here?
Understatement Of The Millennium
Since pop culture enthroned Stephen Hawking, maybe the same should also consider what he said in 2009 at the Origins Symposium at Arizona State University about the appearance of “alien” visitors: “If aliens ever visit us, I think the outcome would be much as when Christopher Columbus first landed in America, which didn’t turn out very well for the Native Americans, it makes sense for them to exploit each new planet for material to build more spaceships so they could move on. Who knows what the limits would be?”
Follow The Bread Crumbs
Hawking essentially zeroed in on their need to utilize our resources to build ships, but since we see them all the time, the jig is up; that’s where the money trail leads. It’s like somebody secretly living in your house has siphoned your money to custom-build a nice car, then they want your house as well but can’t get that, secretly, so they go out only to drive back up and knock on your door to impress you with it, gaining convenient access to overtly go to work making what’s yours, theirs. Obviously they need an introduction, or better-yet, “permission,” and “aliens” wouldn’t require it: it just so happens, demons do. Unfortunately, for those who foam at the mouth saying “don’t insert God, he’s a “myth“, it will not be God that changes your mind.
It’s apparent the world is being programmed to look for the “alien savior” but even with that omni-cultural threat it’s undeniable that the intensified focus is on scientifically, historically and philosophically crippling anything to do with biblical subject-matter; it has, at some point, to be seen for what it really is: the most credible obstruction to the coming deception. That being said, for the record, we see the interconnecting subjects of a watching & waiting higher intelligence, ectropy of technology, progressive directing to genetic enhancements and the general umbrella of “transformation” inlaid with every bit of entertainment. How did being “human” become so terminally-inadequate? Ask yourself why all the billions, even trillions are being spent to escape the so-called “natural” process. Evolution proponents have spent alot of time and resources on the past, but from what we are seeing, it’s the continually programmed future involving our professed need to take “the next step,” cross-culturally prepping mankind for speciation through integration with technology coming from the original gnosis masters (and at what cost?) to supposedly move us “to safety” from pandemics, war, monotheistic conflicts, philosophical disputing, genetic predispositions, impending cosmic/geological events and any other fear being played on to induce necessary panic. The organized spirit of fear is upon us generating a cascade effect to produce doubt or completely disconnect us from intuition. Why do we race to singularity? Running to give what we already away. Maybe it’s really acquiescence to help block what someone else can’t have. Someone who used to have it and lost it, then does not want you to have it. Everyone wants the freedom to at least think their own thoughts, but even that will be end up forbade if we don’t get a united handle on the occult-backed religion disguised as objective science. Biology cannot infinitely regress, and it’s only able to answer the second biggest question; “Who is between us and the answer?” Reactionism in this postmodern climate is evidently being used to volley the blame from group to group while using the team that’s winning at the time for assassins who either don’t know or don’t care they are to join the losers when the observed Doomsday Clock we check from time to time actually reaches 12.