Review of February Meeting

"The intellectual battle is over and Creation has won. The Theory of Evolution can not possibly be true, while Creation is provable." These were the opening words in a tremendous presentation by Michael Butler. Mr. Butler teaches apologetics and philosophy at the Bahnsen Theological Seminary. The title of his presentation was "A Philosopher’s View of Evolution."

Mr. Butler said the debate was not one of science but one of philosophy. He began by stating the Theory of Evolution is not a scientific theory, and gave six reasons:

1) History: The Theory of Evolution was not started by Charles Darwin. He simply marketed it. It’s earliest recording is in the 6th Century by the Greek Philosopher Anaximander. He taught life came from the sea and adapted and became new animals. In the 5th Century B.C., Empedocles elaborated further on evolution. The Theory of Evolution was hardly a new idea in 1859 when Darwin wrote "The Origin of Species." Immanuel Kant (1724-1804) and Georg Hagel(1770-1831) had talked about evolution, but there was no mechanism for it. Darwin’s natural selection was a supposed mechanism to justify it. Creationists simply say natural selection does occur, but it will only produce changes within a population, it is not a mechanism to produce a new family of animals.

2) Evolution is not scientific due to its anti-religion bias: Butler quoted Evolutionists who set up definitions for science which state God is outside of science. Then they point to their definition and will not listen to any mention of God in a scientific discussion, because by definition (theirs), no discussion on science can include God!

3) Science should not be dogmatic, yet the Theory of Evolution is held dogmatically. He quoted Stephen Jay Gould as saying the issue was "not debatable," and Richard Dawkins as saying "Evolution was as sure as the Earth going around the Sun."

4) Evolutionists are intolerant of other explanations. This is obvious due to the lack of hiring Creationists and the fear they have in publicly debating the issue {if anyone reading this knows of a University Professor who is willing to publicly debate please call Bill Morgan at (714) 898-8331 and I will set one up}.

5) Evolution as a Theory is not Empirical. Butler stated the process is not observed, and Evolutionists admit this by dismissing the evidence as being lost over the millions/billions of years the process took place.

6) Evolution is not testable and empty of beneficial conclusions. No biologist ever made a useful discovery due to the evolution paradigm.

Butler at this point presented the scientific shortcomings of Creation; namely the beliefs in the six days of Creation and the 6000 year old earth (note: no age of the earth date is scientific).

Butler then listed five things the Theory of Evolution holds to that go against experience:

1) Everything came from nothing

2) Order came from chaos

3) Life came from non-life

4) Intelligence came from nonintelligence

5) Moral nature came from amoral things

Do these points disprove evolution? No, they just demonstrate Evolution is an irrational faith.

Mr. Butler then gave three reasons why Evolution is "Philosophically Impossible."

1) Epistemology means the Theory of Knowledge (how do we know what we know?) Under the paradigm of evolution, it would be impossible to know if evolution was true. We could not trust random matter assembling itself to make our minds capable of discerning a true theory from a false theory.

2) Evolution can not account for induction. Induction based reasoning is based on experience, i.e.: "since all I see is white swans, all swans must be white." That is an inductive argument. For an evolutionist to use induction to make predictions they must assume nature is uniform, which is an inductive argument. Thus they use induction to make their inductive conclusions.

3) According to evolutionists: Do laws exist? Science is the study of nature. Nature has natural laws, but what is a law? According to naturalists, only material things exist, and a law is not material, so do laws exist? Thus, the theory of evolution is impossible because there could be no laws to write them.

Butler’s conclusions were that the Theory of Evolution is a challenge, but intellectually it is a paper tiger. It is just as religious as Creation, but by its presuppositions it falsifies itself. Its believers rebel against truth and logic.