Scientism is a relatively new word. It describes an exaggerated belief in the ability of science alone to explain the world around us. Our scientific understanding of nature keeps changing, but philosopher J.P. Moreland suggests that our moral sense is more reliable than science.
A common claim among those who believe that Darwinian evolution adequately explains life as we know it is that humans have a lot of leftover parts from our primitive ancestors. Whether it's 'junk DNA' or vestigial organs, the idea is that our ancestors needed these parts for survival, but that we no longer need them.
I love science. I always have. I can't resist clicking to news articles that talk about the discovery of a new species, or some tech advancement, or about the chemical makeup of my favorite soft drink. At the same time, I don't always love discussions about science. The reason is simple: most people don't think very well.
This short-ish video lays out part of the reason that I'm not a young-earther. Most of the young-earth folks I know simply don't want to talk about this subject, pretending that it's beneath them to even consider whether the earth is more than 6,000 years old.
Interesting: according to National Geographic, a controversial new theory could remove as many as one third of all dinosaur species from our encyclopedias. What's the big idea?
Many atheists and modern philosophers are materialists...that is, they reject the notion that anything non-physical exists. The second law of thermodynamics, however, proves them wrong.
I love a good mystery. No, not the Agatha Christie kind...those have never really caught my attention. I mean the real mysteries of life: Stonehenge, the Great Pyramids, the Money Pit, and the rest.
We've been trying to figure out where life comes from for a long time. Aristotle wanted to know. Darwin and Pasteur wanted to know. Seems like everyone wants to know how life on Earth came to be.
