Darwin was wrong, Part 2

The definition of theory from the Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary

1: the analysis of a set of facts in their relation to one another
2: abstract thought : speculation
3: the general or abstract principles of a body of fact, a science, or an art
4 a: a belief, policy, or procedure proposed or followed as the basis of action b: an ideal or hypothetical set of facts, principles, or circumstances —often used in the phrase in theory
5: a plausible or scientifically acceptable general principle or body of principles offered to explain phenomena
6 a: a hypothesis assumed for the sake of argument or investigation b: an unproved assumption : conjecture c: a body of theorems presenting a concise systematic view of a subject

My article in regard to Darwin and his theory of evolution generated a number of enraged comments from the atheist community. Grudgingly, they acknowledged my right to my opinion, but one even went so far as to state that I had no right to my own facts. Apparently only those who adhere to the atheist orthodoxy have a right to state facts.

Here are some additional facts with regard to what the atheist elite hold as their faith. I use the term faith because that is exactly what it is. The assumption that this universe is nothing more than a happy accident is no more provable than the assumption that it was created in a 168 hour period. Both assumptions have to be taken as a matter of faith. Note definition 6 from Webster.

One commenter argued that australopithecines and other fossils proved that the missing link had been found. Obviously they did little research beyond visiting agenda-oriented websites because R. Leaky, one of the most prominent scientists in archeology, had a problem with that very fossil record. One major problem was the community using adolescent fossils as adult to prove the link.

The paragraph below comes from a highly respected argument involving the problem of calling human evolution anything more than a supposition.

“It really is unnecessary to any longer extend coverage of the australopithecine fossil record. The fact is true humans appeared in the fossil record before the australopithecines and lived as contemporaries with them throughout all their history, revealing that australopithecines had nothing to do with human origins. Matt Cartmill of Duke Univ., David Pilbeam of Harvard, and Glynn Isaac of Harvard observe: "The australopithecines are rapidly sinking back to the status of peculiarly specialized apes...."

The evolutionist’s case for australopithecines as human ancestors was based on three claims: 1. big brained 2.bipedal 3. Appeared in the fossil record at a relevant time. Contrarily, brain size is less important than brain organization, evidence of bipedality is controversial but irrelevant as bipedality does not prove a human relationship, and as shown by the Laetoli footprints, when australopithecines first appeared in the fossil record, true humans were already walking.”

During the middle ages, the Roman Church was also the chief political power in the civilized world. Despite the atheist claims, it was not a Christian organization and the tortured were more often than not actual believers in Jesus Christ as well as observant Jews. The record is there if you choose to look. It is not unusual for the atheist community to attack the christian cummunity on flimsy evidence that really doesn’t even rise past the level of hypothesis. When an emotional response is all you have to go with, very little is surprising.

Today, the attacks on Sarah Palin from the Obama camp have never risen past that level. Today it is the clothes she wears. Yesterday it was her health records. Yet the Obama campaign has yet to release one piece of paper regarding their messiah or his background. They claim he is a Harvard graduate but we have no transcript. They claim he is an American-born citizen, but we have no birth certificate. They say Sarah Palin is dangerously unqualified for high office because of her faith, but they insist on the American voter to take Barrack Hussein Obama on faith. An interesting dichotomy, isn’t it?

Obama’s record places him in the true center of the atheist elite’s perfect candidate. He has consistently argued for legalizing the murder of babies while they are being born. He has argued that citizens who successfully defend themselves against an attacker in their homes be declared the criminal, not the attacker. He says he will immediately activate the so-called fairness doctrine, thus censoring the opinion of millions of Americans, and he has declared that anyone who successfully builds a business must “share the wealth” or be declared an enemy of the state.

What the atheist elite consistently fail to realize is that the moment this country adopts what they hope for, they will be the first to go. A Marxist Dictatorship has always eliminated the intellectuals, whether they were right or not.