In the thread about whether the religious want scientific enquiry to end, slevesque made this statement:
An intelligent christian that rejects the ToE won't reject the science behind it, he will reject the assumptions and the interpretations behind it.
I replied:
This is a common creationist misconception.
There are really only two assumptions behind the ToE; our senses provide us with accurate information about the real world behind us, and our intellect allows us to come to reliable conclusions based on the evidence we see. Coincidentally, these are the same two assumptions upon which rest all of science.
There followed are series of exchanges between slevesque, me and several others who were pursuing the topic. Based on a Nosy Admin throwing his weight around, I propose this topic:
What are the assumptions that creationists think the ToE is based on, or upon which it relies? slevesque discussed to some degree the assumptions he thought Darwin made in Origin, and I wouldn't mind a bit of discussion of that, but mainly I'd like to focus on what assumptions the ToE relies on today.
Is it Science, I would think.
Ridicule is the only weapon which can be used against unintelligible propositions. Ideas must be distinct before reason can act upon them; and no man ever had a distinct idea of the trinity. It is the mere Abracadabra of the mountebanks calling themselves the priests of Jesus. -- Thomas Jefferson
For we know that our patchwork heritage is a strength, not a weakness. We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and non-believers. -- Barack Obama
We see monsters where science shows us windmills. -- Phat
™ Version 4.2