Welcome to the home of The Question Evolution Project. Presenting information demonstrating that there is no truth in minerals-to-man evolution, and presenting evidence for special creation. —Established by Cowboy Bob Sorensen

Thursday, December 1, 2016

Life Degraded to Mere Chemistry

Proponents of minerals-to-man evolution tend to take a reductionist approach and reduce all life to chemistry. This comes from their materialistic presuppositions including no God and that evolution is a given. This dehumanizing worldview affects both scientists and us regular folk, since evolution is viewed as a science and, therefore, truth, so it spills over into economics, religion, politics, abortion, "scientific" racism, and more.

Materialist evolutionists reduce and degrade life to mere chemistry, and biblical creationists know life is far more. It all comes down to worldviews.
Image credit: jk1991 at FreeDigitalPhotos.net
Materialism rules the scientific community, and data are interpreted through this view. Just follow the money, and you'll see that funding goes toward evolutionary goals. Scientists with a creationary worldview are not getting the grant money, no matter how good their credentials are. In fact, creationists are mostly blackballed.

Evolutionary owlhoots are intolerant of their own their own kind who don't absolutely toe the line. An author said that an old carving looked like a dinosaur, and secularists went ballistic. Authors of a paper in PLoS One dared to use the word "creator", and again, secularists were upset — they were offended at the "inappropriate language", demanding a retraction! Can't be having anyone plant seeds of doubt of the evolutionary faith, ya idjit!

Viewing life as just chemistry and that there is no Creator is dreadful for science and society as a whole. Interpretation of evidence is a matter of worldviews. You can tell this when scientists will try to prove the origin of life in the lab, get a few assorted amino acids, and say, "See? Evolution!" Not hardly. That's proof that educated scientists using high-tech lab equipment and reproducing assumed conditions got a few results that are not life. Nice try at the intelligent design, though.
Evolutionists and creationists seem to debate endlessly about everything. Complicated technical arguments about amino acids, nucleotides, meteorites, thermodynamics, and biological mechanisms may come across as disconnected and irrelevant to daily life, but these seemingly trivial debates are like two opposing football players’ mini-battle. Understanding how everything fits together is easier if a person can see the bigger picture.

Therefore, taking one step back from amino acid debates reveals that their context is a widespread provocative claim that “life is only chemistry.” For instance, two evolutionary authorities recently said, “Indeed, as van Helmont concluded in 1648, and as is even today the rallying cry at conferences on the origin and evolution of life, it seems quite clear that ‘all life is chemistry.’” Whether that is true or not may affect daily life in areas as diverse as health care policies, religion, or the wisdom of tax expenditures on projects searching for aliens.

Evidence shows that evolutionary assertions that life is only chemistry constitute another major blunder. While significant, that lesson is secondary. More important is how a “life is chemistry” declaration illustrates that quarrels over details are truly significant when they are recognized as being nested in opposing worldviews that claim to be truth. Discovering the concealed links between basic research and a worldview is a fascinating exercise.
To read the rest, click on "Major Evolutionary Blunders: Imagining That Life Is Only Chemistry". 

Looking for a comment area?
You can start your own conversation by using the buttons below!