Evolution's Circular Reasoning

[RigMedic]

At least 6 different radiometric dating methods are available. The assumed age of the sample will dictate which dating method is used because each will give a different result.

"When dinosaur bones containing carbon are found, they are not carbon dated because the result would be only a few thousand years. Because this would not match the assumed age based on the geologic column, scientists use another method of dating to give an age closer to the desired result. All radiometric results that do not match the preassigned ages of the geologic column are discarded."

-Dr. Kent Hovind

"Contrary to what most scientists write, the fossil record does not support the Darwinian theory of evolution because it is this theory (there are several) which we use to interpret the fossil record. By doing so we are guilty of circular reasoning if we the say the fossil record supports this theory."

-Ronald R. West Ph.D.

[MorningGlory]

At least 6 different radiometric dating methods are available. The assumed age of the sample will dictate which dating method is used because each will give a different result.

"When dinosaur bones containing carbon are found, they are not carbon dated because the result would be only a few thousand years. Because this would not match the assumed age based on the geologic column, scientists use another method of dating to give an age closer to the desired result. All radiometric results that do not match the preassigned ages of the geologic column are discarded."

-Dr. Kent Hovind

"Contrary to what most scientists write, the fossil record does not support the Darwinian theory of evolution because it is this theory (there are several) which we use to interpret the fossil record. By doing so we are guilty of circular reasoning if we the say the fossil record supports this theory."

-Ronald R. West Ph.D.

[canuckamuck]

Rig medic, I am not sure how to respond, you didn't really propose a conclusion or question. But it is nice to see some scientific honesty.

Edited January 2, 2010 by canuckamuck

[RigMedic]

I simply thought it was interesting and i wanted to share it.

[RigMedic]

Lurker, Im a bit confused. Correct me if im wrong, but is your stance that there is a God, but evolution is the mechanism he uses to create life?

And if this is the case, where do you get your source of truth from, the Bible, or something else?

[ollkiller]

Lurker, Im a bit confused. Correct me if im wrong, but is your stance that there is a God, but evolution is the mechanism he uses to create life?

I can't answer for Lurker but i can tell you that the in Ireland that is the general consensus. Most believers here believe in evolution and God. Now the catholic church is dominant in Ireland (not as much as it once was especially with all the abuse cases) and the church does say evolution is valid so believers follow their lead.

[MorningGlory]

Having the RCC come out and deny the Genesis account was the final proof for me that they are no longer relevant. As if I needed it.

[MorningGlory]

Lurker, Im a bit confused. Correct me if im wrong, but is your stance that there is a God, but evolution is the mechanism he uses to create life?

And if this is the case, where do you get your source of truth from, the Bible, or something else?

No, evolution is the mechanism through which the diversity of life was created. How the order of the creation of life itself was carried out is still in debate, it's certainly possible that God supernaturally intervened to form the first single-celled organisms, it's also possible that he created a universe ordered so that the chemical evolution of life was pre-determined. I get my sources of truth from the Bible and from observing creation, after all if God is the author of both and God is a god of truth then the stories in both should be true since two truths cannot contradict each other.

Lurker

Thinking logically, why would God create single celled organisms and lead them through a long, convoluted evolutionary process (with many twists, turns and dead ends) when He could simply create the beings he wanted and take away the ones He decided were no longer relevant to His plan? The TOE doesn't make sense.... purely from that viewpoint.

[MorningGlory]

Why would God create people and lead them through a long, convoluted, process with many twists, turns and dead ends

He wouldn't...and He didn't. Our species, Homo Sapiens Sapiens, is the same today as when the first of our kind appeared a few thousand years ago.

when He could simply create the beings He wanted and take away the ones He decided were no longer relevant to His plan?

He did. The original homanids (Neanderthalensis and those before him) were taken away.

Lurker

[Guest shiloh357]

Lurker, Im a bit confused. Correct me if im wrong, but is your stance that there is a God, but evolution is the mechanism he uses to create life?

And if this is the case, where do you get your source of truth from, the Bible, or something else?

No, evolution is the mechanism through which the diversity of life was created. How the order of the creation of life itself was carried out is still in debate, it's certainly possible that God supernaturally intervened to form the first single-celled organisms, it's also possible that he created a universe ordered so that the chemical evolution of life was pre-determined. I get my sources of truth from the Bible and from observing creation, after all if God is the author of both and God is a god of truth then the stories in both should be true since two truths cannot contradict each other.

Lurker

The process of evolution is contrary to the nature of an all-knowing God, and the description given in Scripture. God created each catetgory of life and called it "good." The nuance of the word "good" in Hebrew carries the sense of complete. However, from an evolutionary standpoint, it would not be complete at all, but would still need to "evolve" into more sophisticated species. That contradicts the biblical record.

An all-knowing God does not have any use for evolution, as God creates perfectly making macro-evolution an inferior, obsolete process. For a God who can create all things perfectly and has all knowledge about the entire universe, evolution would actually be a long step backwards.

As to the OP, the circular reasoning stems from the fact that Evolution is assumed to be true from the outset and the evidence is interpreted in order to fit the assumption.