BBAS 64 said:
Good Day, All
My daughter has been given an assignment in school to write a paper in opposiontion to evolution according to Darwin. The problem is the teacher is only providing resources "pro" Darwin. So if you know of any online stuff that would help would you be so kind as to post it here.
Peace to u,
Bill
"Although much remains obscure, and will long remain obscure, I can entertain no doubt, after the most deliberate study and dispassionate judgement of which I am capable, that the view which most naturalists entertain, and which I formerly entertained -- namely, that each species has been
independently created -- is erroneous. I am fully convinced that species are not immutable; but that those belonging to what are called the same genera are lineal descendants of some other and generally extinct species, in the same manner as the acknowledged varieties of any one species are the descendants of that species. Furthermore, I am convinced that Natural Selection has been the main but not exclusive means of modification. "
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/origin/introduction.html
Darwin's On the Origin of Species was one long arguement against 'special creation'. It is not considered science if the evidence suggests that God or an intelligent designer created life, or anything else for that matter. What they don't want to admit is that Darwinism is itself theological, all antithesitic arguments are.
"The imperfection argument for evolution is popular and compelling. It draws on widely shared intuitions about God and the nature and history of the structure of organisms. Discussing the argument with philosophers and biologists, I was struck by how many of them accepted it unreservedly as an impeccable piece of scientific reasoning.
Despite its wide appeal, however, the argument is also deeply problematical. The argument employs theological concepts, such as "a wise creator," and aesthetic or teleological notions, "perfection" and "imperfection," that cannot perform the analytical and empirical work required of them. Each premise of the argument is attended with difficulties."
http://www.arn.org/docs/nelson/pn_jettison.htm
If arguments for 'special creation' are not allowed in science, then why are arguments against 'special creation' allowed?
Darwinism argues against 'special creation' but no one is allowed to argue for it. That and the fact that natural selection does not explain the very thing it is supposed to, the complete transformation of one species into another. (see my signiture)
"...evolutionary biology, has not identified a specifically causal explanation for the origin of true morphological novelty during the history of life. "
http://www.discovery.org/scripts/viewDB/index.php?command=view&id=2177
Hope that helps a little.
Grace and peace,
Mark
