HELEN As I have participated in these debates, there is something that strikes me again and again. Why are the Darwinists – the evolutionists – fighting? There is an essential lack of logic in their position involved on several points: 1. If evolution is true, then how we think is programmed into us. Our very thought processes are matters of evolutionary development and should just be accepted as such. I am religious because I was ‘wired’ to be religious. Atheists are ‘wired’ to be atheists, etc. Therefore what creationists believe should simply be accepted as part of their evolutionary development. 2. It has been said consistently by evolutionists that science is not interested in truth; truth is metaphysical and does not belong in the realm of science. Science is looking for the natural, material explanation for things, and I can only conclude that they are looking for these explanations whether or not they are true! Therefore, my concern with the truth, as a creationist, should not bother them at all, for it is outside their concern. The other way of looking at this point, from their direction, is that since truth is not an issue, one untruth is as good as another ethically, so creationism is no big deal. 3. Since our thought processes are results of evolutionary development, which in its turn is dependant on time and chance, there is no guarantee that what anyone thinks can be trusted any more than simple chance can be trusted. We are the results of random mutations and natural selection, according to evolution, but that means nothing because so are their thought processes, which gives no reason to believe what anyone thinks or says! In other words, evolution says we are not responsible for who we are, or the way we think. When they then ‘fight’ for what science is taught in schools as wanting it to be honest or true (which to them simply means ‘mainstream’), that is an oxymoron. They cannot claim to want truth there when they deny it in science itself. They cannot try to resort to something being ‘right’ when right is not only subjective, but wired into a person’s thinking, in their view. They are illogical at the core of it. This explains to me why they are so willing to twist what has been said by creationists who are attempting to present truth about what is seen and what is interpreted; about what is objective and what is subjective. I watched it in the “Irreducible Complexity” thread and the “Questions for Evolutionists” thread in particular in the past week or so. The true evolutionist position is atheistic, their verbiage aside. Both immediate and final causes are demanded to be natural and material. This eliminates God from the picture entirely. I submit that this is the actual reason for an insistence on evolution. They are not interested in truth, anyway, according to them, so there is no problem with denying God exists, let alone that He is the Creator. The theistic evolutionist is heretical from where I stand because he is trying to tell God what God is allowed to do, both past and present: “you are allowed to start it all off, God, but then you have to back off and not get involved again, because the way you started it must result in everything happening naturally and materially after that. You are not to enter the picture again – unless, of course, it is for our salvation and benefit. Then we will allow you a miracle or two with Jesus, but that’s it, you hear? No more before or after that one!” Pure heresy. I don’t find theistic evolution to be worth the time to try to fight it. These people are deliberately choosing to fit God into what they can deal with and that’s not God at all; that’s their imagination working overtime. Which works fine if you are an evolutionist and not concerned with the truth of the matter! Evolution’s true and logical position regarding what is taught in schools or believed by anyone should be that people should be left alone, because they can’t help what they are or how they think anyway. They are products of evolution and therefore not responsible for themselves. It should be obvious I disagree strongly. I know we are not like that. I know we have choices about what we will consider true and what beliefs we will build our lives around. And I know that the very concept of truth and right themselves deny evolution in its essence. I know God is real and involved, and I know that science cannot get past simple variation within kind by any means other than direct genetic manipulation, and that even this is really not producing anything new in form or function in any living being; the best it can do is substitute and hope something works. On the other hand, they are also illogical to hope. What will be, will be…. Evolution demands suspension of all daily experience and reality. I am talking here of the idea that everything has a natural material cause and that all forms of life therefore are the results of time, chance, mutations, and natural selection. The ONLY way evolution can really be believed is through a denial of reality as we know it and a radical departure from logic itself.