Undeceived Wrote:Evolutionist: "I can't find the scientific proof yet, but until then I will believe there is some."
Agreed. The scientist will formulate a theory based on minor observations that they have gathered so far. Then it's a matter of experimentation and data collection to see whether the evidence will back up the theory.
Quote:For every 'God of the Gaps' there is a 'Naturalism of the Gaps' to match. We haven't found 99.9% of the fossil record, but people still hold out for naturalistic solutions to life. They may not ever appear. Both sides have to assume a stance, and either one could easily accuse the other of lacking proof. Evolution is a history and response theory, meaning it moulds to the closest naturalistic solution, rather than being confirmed by fairly-drawn evidence. Every time a contradiction comes up, scientists alter the theory to include another yet-to-be-proven assertion. Much of the 'evidence' you see is really criteria. Evolutionists need the earth to be old, so they use long half-life techniques. They know all energy came from one source and one beginning, so they formulate a "Big Bang." How many discoveries in science were obtained by an objective baseboard? We look at the universe and try to figure out how it works by observing it. We can't study the laws governing the universe, and we can't get outside for an objective, unfiltered view. When we use a microscope to study another microscope, we are limited. Knowledge is always at net zero. We explain the natural with our opinion of the natural (wherever that came from) and dismiss God as soon as we find he doesn't fit into the little touchable box labeled "nature". Objectivism, or Absolute Truth, requires a transcending standard. God is the only transcending standard humans know about. Not only does he have grounds to be considered, but the existence of a subjective reality indicates the existence of an objective one--therefore he should be considered, and deeply.
To me, it sounds like you think scientists have some sort of agenda. Well, they're dealing with science and science doesn't have an agenda of any sort. Science isn't a movement against deities. It's simply a variety of methods with which we can learn about nature. And that's the problem with the theist. They see science as a direct attack on their faith. Why? because the religious such as Christian creationists are bold enough to make materialistic claims like the earth is only 6 000 years old, and when science says otherwise through reason they have to start doing all sorts of mental backflips to avoid the implications of that.
Theists can keep pointing out the missing puzzle pieces in the theory of evolution but what they don't realise is that it hasn't always been like that. Science has been consistently (and unintentionally) been pushing the domain of God into the corners of the universe as more knowledge gets uncovered. So to you, evolution might be the area where science 'stumbles' but before you know it it's going to uncover the secrets and then just keep going. History is a testimony to that.
"It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it" ~ Aristotle
