Click here to jump straight to the whole article, so interesting you will read all the way to the end. Or keep scrolling to read the first few paragraphs.
|by||Jeff Miller, Ph.D.|
Nye’s Defense of Naturalistic Evolution
Evolution is a Historical Science
- Premise One—Evolution is a naturalistic origin model.
- Premise Two—Evolution requires abiogenesis and other unnatural phenomena.
Flawed Evolutionary Dating Techniques
Conflicting Dates from a Fossilized Forest
Assumptions and Evolution
When people make assumptions based on radiometric dating; when they make assumptions about the expanding Universe; when they make assumptions about the rate at which genes change in populations of bacteria in laboratory growth media; they’re making assumptions based on previous experience. They’re not coming out of whole cloth.
“[M]aking assumptions based on previous experience” would be incorrect since that “previous experience” did not include the Flood.
So this idea, that you can separate the natural laws of the past from the natural laws that we have now, I think, is at the heart of our disagreement. I don’t, I don’t see how we’re ever going to agree with that if you insist that natural laws have changed. It’s, for lack of a better word, it’s magical. And I have appreciated magic since I was a kid, but it’s not really what we want in conventional, mainstream science…. I encourage you to explain to us why, why we should accept your word for it that natural law changed just 4,000 years ago. Completely. And there’s no record of it.