Are you talking evolution or origins? ... Other than the latter had to happen for the former to proceed.
Okay, for the sake of the argument, let's assume that the universe was created 13.7 billion years ago, complete with all the "natural laws" that science determines to exist, and in absolutely no need for further tinkering ... a Deist creation.
How does this mean that evolution cannot proceed?
If - on the other hand - all you mean is that there must have been
an origin for evolution to proceed (natural OR supernatural doesn't matter) then all you have done is stated something rather trivial: we exist, therefore there was some kind of origin.
You have no prove for origin,...
Nobody has a
proof for origin. Therefore this is not a special criticism of science.
What we can do is start with the present and work backwards through the evidence to see what we can understand, and what concepts are invalid.
We can show that the earth is not flat for instance. Most people will agree with this, however there are some "flat-earthers" that have trouble accepting this fact, and this comes back to the topic -- how do you connect evidence to valid conclusions?
How do you validate concepts and ideas? Do you test them against evidence of objective reality or do you compare them to previous concepts, preconceptions?
Enjoy.
Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click)
we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
RebelAAmericanOZen[Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.
™ Version 4.2
