If you go to any public school or university, you will find The Big Bang to man evolutionary view of origins it's the only view that you will hear. Efforts to include Biblical creation or even simply the possibility of an intelligent designer have not been just met with criticism in various forms of personal attacks, but actual lawsuits. this has been part of an overall attempt to remove God completely from the schools and from public life. However, this is not how science is supposed to work. Real science allows for the options to be discussed; these lawsuits are effectively science by judicial decree.

While there are some famous trials such as the scopes trial, the details of these step trials along with the mistakes made are not what's at issue here. What the very problem is, is using lawsuits to force out, particularly from public education alternative perspectives. Having a judge rule on what is and is not science is without question the most anti-scientific action one can take. However, this issue is ultimately not about science, but about the pushing of a worldview that is absolutely naturalistic and atheistic. For example, the main legal argument against intelligent design is referencing God and therefore this is teaching religion and therefore violates the Establishment Clause of the US constitution. This argument is the fact that the Establishment Clause was intended to prevent a specific official state church, not to keep God out completely, effectively turning atheism into the state religion.

Analyzing the merits of any particular case is beyond the scope of this article, what is important is that this is the mentality that leads to lawsuits. It is a mentality that is not interested in honest discussion, but in having its way by any means possible. It is a mentality that can lead to persecution of those who hold other positions even to the point of murder. it also has the side effect of the weaknesses of naturalistic theories not being taught. The consequence is that those who receive such a one-sided education, end up ignorant of those weaknesses.

 This type of one-sided education results in people who are absolutely convinced that all the evidence points objectively to The Big Bang to man story. This accidentally produces blind faith in these claims that makes them think that anybody who disagrees with it is either ignorant or deliberately ignoring evidence. I recently got into a discussion with a lawyer, about how relativity would allow for the possibility of a young earth, in a universe that we can see that is billions of light years in size. his final words were to accuse me of misinterpreting relativity, even though he knows I'm a trained physicist. In other words, he was trained in schools to look at the evidence from one particular perspective and even though somebody trained in that subject another way of looking at it he cannot see it any other way than how he was trained. This is a sad fact, that results from dealing with what is ultimately a scientific dispute by judicial decree.

 The simple fact of the matter is that what constitutes a scientific view on origins or any other topic is a scientific question. With regards to creation versus evolution, or intelligent design versus blind natural processes, this question is at the heart of what science is. Questions like this need to be decided by open and honest scientific discussion and not by a judge whose last science class was probably the easiest to pass science course that he could find, so as to fulfill a science elective for his bachelor's degree. In fact, the most unscientific thing that someone can do is to try to settle a scientific question by filing a lawsuit against a position you disagree with regardless of your reason or motive. The simple fact of the matter is that the worst type of science is science by judicial decree.

Help support these articles.


No comments

Leave your comment

In reply to Some User