Times Examiner Facebook Logo

Sunday, April 14, 2024 - 07:04 AM

INDEPENDENT CONSERVATIVE VOICE OF UPSTATE SOUTH CAROLINA

First Published in 1994

INDEPENDENT CONSERVATIVE VOICE OF
UPSTATE SOUTH CAROLINA

For something to be considered scientific you know it has to be the possibility of it being false but for this to be the case you have to allow for other possibilities to be considered. Because abiogenesis is the only naturalistic possibility by definition as long as naturalism rules the research no other possibilities such as an intelligent designer will even be allowed no matter how much the evidence points to it.

The simple fact is that the only real alternative to abiogenesis that of life being created by an intelligent designer God is not allowed by establishment science. This has been made clear not only from lawsuits being used to keep this possibility out of the public-school science curriculum even when used in the most generic sense possible but also by the reaction of religious anger that results when intelligent design shows up positively in mainstream scientific literature.

What about panspermia, you may ask? Isn't that an alternative to abiogenesis? The answer is no it is not, this is because all panspermia does is move abiogenesis to a long time ago in a galaxy far far away, and therefore totally untestable. Panspermia is not an alternative but nothing more than a relocation. It is still a Biogenesis but elsewhere in the universe.

Ultimately the scientific establishment will not allow the real alternative to abiogenesis. It will only allow totally naturalistic explanations and therefore God is excluded before 1 bit data is even looked at.

No comments

Leave your comment

In reply to Some User