Has Science and the Scientific Method been misused? That was a question asked in my blog Elusive Transitional Forms. The following is another excerpt taken from “Truth and Science – Is Real Science At Risk?”, an article by Dr. Arv Edgeworth*. Ponder the questions he poses at the end and consider – are these viable questions that should be asked, and if they are being asked today or have been asked in the past?
The Origin of Life
Have you noticed lately the tendency in science books to no longer consider Biogenesis a Law of Science? Has any new evidence or experimentation given reason to question this as a law of science? No. Could it be because it is just in conflict with abiogenesis? Is it possible that some educators just don’t want abiogenesis to be in opposition to a known Law of Science, so they attempt to downgrade Biogenesis from a “Law” status? Is that what is happening? If it is, will that have a negative effect on the scientific process?
Are these reasonable questions that should be asked?
1. “Isn’t Biogenesis a law of science?” (Life only comes from other life)
2. “Is the hypothesis of abiogenesis (life from non-life) scientific?” (Has it ever been observed?)
3. “If chemical evolution isn’t happening today, how do we know it happened in the past?”
Personally, whether it is the beginning of the universe, or the beginning of life, I think we should discuss “origins” in another venue, not the science classroom. Why even have it in the textbooks?
Mutations and Natural Selection
Mutations are random chance happenings. They are not supposed to be directional. One beneficial mutation is supposed to be extremely rare, and almost unheard of. But a series of these occurring that took an irritation on the skin of an early life form through a totally non-directed process until humans have two eyes, that depend upon about 40 individual subsystems, that all have to be connected to a brain, to allow us to see; is an occurrence that would seem to be mathematically impossible to say the least. Before this would occur, shouldn’t there be such an accumulation of non-beneficial mutations that the life form would already be extinct?
Are these reasonable questions that should be asked?
1. “Aren’t mutations almost always harmful?”
2. “Don’t mutations usually cause a net loss of information over time?”
3. “Wouldn’t mutations usually be the least likely to survive?”
Should scientists be looking for another possibility? Are some perhaps allowing their philosophical worldview to affect their science perspective? Or is there another reason?
Once again, good questions to ponder.
*www.truthandscience.net - website of Dr. Arv Edgeworth.
Lanny Johnson
If you would like to see if an AOI seminar is right for you, or you would like to help the work of Alpha Omega Institute, please visit our website events page or our donate page. Keep up to date with what AOI is doing. Thanks for your partnership.
While I was on tour teaching creation in Eureka, CA, my host pastor asked me to teach to a particular audience I had never taught before. I have taught in jails, private and public schools and colleges, homeschool groups, private homes, camps, churches, etc., but I had never taught to the homeless.
