The Ghost of Paley
Posts: 1703
Joined: Oct. 2005
|
Dave, I've got a question that I'm dying to hear you answer. If you don't want to answer it here, please drop me a PM.
I've heard you and other Christian fundamentalists complain that we shouldn't treat macroevolution as "real" science because we can't directly observe a "kind" transform into another "kind". In other words, we lack direct evidence, and must instead rely on circumstantial evidence.
OK, but if that reasoning holds, then shouldn't we open our prisons and free all prisoners convicted on circumstantial evidence? After all, most criminals are in jail due to cutting deals, and most of those deals were predicated on the very type of circumstantial evidence that evolution uses. Heck, even if the prosecutor has witness testimony, it's often very shaky and only a minor component to the case. Yet some states are willing to kill a man on the class of evidence you deem unscientific. So should we make major reforms in our judicial system, or would you say that circumstantial evidence is good enough to put a man in the electric chair, yet not good enough for the classroom? I've yet to hear a good answer for this.
--------------
Dey can't 'andle my riddim.
|
