posted on May, 4 2011 @ 08:13 AM
Originally posted by stereologistThat's the line put out by creationists. Religion and science are very different. The dogma of science
is the ability to accept new ideas. The dogma of religion is to NOT accept new ideas. Macroevolution is a false title assigned by creationists. It is
not a part of true science.
True science is observation and experimentation, and any theory purporting to be scientific must be falsifiable. I'm not aware of anyone having
proposed any way to falsify macroevolution. Instead, every time some discovery is made that should have been accepted as falsification has been
brushed aside as a mere "adjustment"; that is, they keep moving the goalposts. So the charge of "dogma" lies as surely at the feet of evolutionism as
any other faith-based system; its zealots have unshakable faith that no discovery will ever refute it, hence it is unfalsifiable.
Macroevolution is merely a "handle" on the teaching also known as "molecules to man". It means the belief that life evolved from nonlife, whether on
this planet or some other, regardless of how far back the line is pushed. It is evolutionists who invented the theory, not creationists.
I also don't know of anything in the book on the hydroplate theory that clashes with empirical, testable, verifiable, observable science, but
only with the tectonic plate theory.
Well let's list a few items that have been overlooked.
1. The water would have been released in a phreatic explosion destroying the surface - see Krakatoa
2. Where is the evidence of the water release? Nothing exists just like the failed global flood tale.
3. How was the water contained within the Earth?
4. No evidence for a global flood
5. There is no means of forming a trapped water Earth
This is a good example proving my point: you deny a global flood (though some scientists propose there was once water covering all of Mars) and deny
the evidence of it: the fossil record. Both sides have the same evidence but different theories; yet only one side fears and even goes to law to
silence the other.
But I'm not in this thread to go another round on the evo debate; I'm tired of that after many years. I'm here because the sacred cow theory of plate
tectonics is finally being seriously challenged and am intrigued by the ideas. Science, true science, does not fear any such questioning, is
falsifiable, and doesn't appeal to popularity.
edit on 4-5-2011 by SaberTruth because: typos
edit on 4-5-2011 by SaberTruth because: fix quote nesting