People accuse us of being anti-science. We understand why. On the face of it we've evaluated the scientific method, found it wanting, and rejected it. We exposed the logical fallacy of scientific truths.
This commandment is given in the context of dietary restriction, or the lack of them, and how this can play out in the life of a believer. It has much broader application.
It should be apparent, firstly, what a profound impact Darwin's work has had on the development of human civilization but, secondly, how simple it is to eliminate its influence as a hindrance to the truth.
The majority of Christians think of evolution as the process by which organic life developed from molecules to humans. It's a definition of evolution that no one else uses.
According to the rules of the scientific method the truth isn't scientific, therefore it has to be rejected. That's what we call Popper's Paradox.
One of the ways that popular science (SciPop) attempts to be rigorous and hold itself accountable is through use of something called the scientific method. It's a systematic approach to investigation.
Christians don’t like Matty’s Paradigm because we have to refute some things that they believe about the Bible, and show how modern theology is a product of spaghetti syndrome.
Stellar spectroscopy conveniently ignores the possibility that stars are reflecting sunlight and incorporates itself into one of the most intricate examples of circular reasoning ever devised. Circular reasoning is a problem in science where people make up fiction that suits their narrative, then use the fiction to rationalize more fiction. A good example is heliocentricity. …
Evolution "change in allele frequency in a population over time" started in Genesis 3. It's not a lie, it's an extensively documented process of change over time. Evolution isn't a problem. Abiogenesis isn't a problem.
The Recent Epoch is everything since Peleg's tectonics. Few people have had a greater influence on this time than Charles Darwin.