Recently, I had a request that seemed reasonable to me at first glance that a couple of areas that I tend to bring up, such as the past not being fixed, be left off from threads because they could be used to challenge nearly any evo position on any thread or some such. This is not to complain about that request, but thinking on this, it illustrates a simple fact.
Assumptions rig how we interpret data, and thus what we accept as a fact.
Let me illustrate. Let's say we are talking about whether the Bible fits in with the data in respect to the scripture that death entered into the world through Adam's transgression.
Assuming a linear perspective of causality and time, one would assume that there should be a record of no death prior to mankind, and then radical changes after Adam's fall (or the other approach could be to say the biblical passage is not literal). For sake of argument here, let's just assume the correct interpretation is there existed no death prior to the Fall (not sure that is right, but just to illustrate a point).
Well, the critic of the Bible would say it's not true because we have a record of things dying (fossils) that predate man, but is that an accurate criticism.
Let's look at the earth and the universe in a more scientific and holistic manner. The earth can be described not just as a sphere floating in space travelling through time, but as a streak within space-time (time being relative). So we have this system that does not include death.
The assumption is that the introduction of death into the system was introduced into a system only from one point forward rather than into the whole system. if one thinks of death as entirely outside the system, then the introduction of death should have well affected all points in the system, including the past.
Think of it this way. Reality is generated by a program that does not contain death, and then death is added to the program generating reality so that now, physical reality contains this principle. Another way to get your head around it is to think of the universe as the collapsed state of a quantum superstate on a macro-scale, and with new information, the state of the time-line is changed entirely so that a new path is indicated, one that contains death.
If this was true, we would expect the general patterns in the original creation to be true, but to be changed significantly and probably still changing.
This is just one example, but it shows how what is a fact is determined by what assumptions one uses to interpret data. If one assumes a linear time-line of causality (which imo is fading as scientifically valid), then it is a fact that death preceded man perhaps. If one assumes the system can be affected as a whole, and that non-linear causality is possible, then it is not a fact that death preceded the creation of man.
I would submit on every thread, the underlying assumptions ought to be fair game to be challenged as these assumptions determine what is a fact and what is not.
™ Version 4.2