|email - July 2012|
We received more emails about Dylan and from Dylan.
Several people wrote to express their thoughts about Dylanís emails in the last two newsletters (May, June). Dylan also wrote to comment on our presentation of his emails.
I expect this will be the last time we directly deal with Dylan. The significance of these emails is that they demonstrate how differently Dylan sees himself from the way other people see Dylan. The only reason this is relevant is because Dylanís email is typical of the email we get from evolutionists. So this isnít really a discussion of Dylan, or a futile attempt to change his mind. We present these emails to illustrate the stark difference between the way the two sides see the issues, and emphasize that it isnít really about science. Science isnít controversialóbut the philosophy driving the evolutionists to defend an unscientific theory is. If it were about science, then evolutionists would realize that science is against evolution, and the theory of evolution would be abandoned.
The first email came to us from someone who identified himself only as ďa former science teacher.Ē The size emphasis in his email is his, not ours. The color highlights are ours.
Unfortunately, Dylan is typical of evolutionists that say they are interested in scientific truth but are sadly misled about the real world politics that goes on...especially here in America. Just the fact that Al Gore and Barack Obama both received the Nobel Peace Prize should be proof that the award is now meaningless (except for the cash!) (I wouldn't mind winning it for that but would be embarrassed by association with the other 2.)
Dylan never saw the other side of the coin. As he thought someone that disproved evolution conclusively would be rewarded, even more so would anyone be rewarded that proved evolution correct conclusively. Neither can be proven scientifically. It's amazing to me that evolutionists say that the supernatural is impossible and yet believe that evolution happened supernaturally. (Breaking at least one of the fixed Laws of Science)
Thanks for your efforts, newsletter, and website.
I know a little how you feel. I once had a 6th grade dropout laugh and ridicule me because "Everyone KNOWS evolution is true." with the added, "Didn't you know science had proven it already?"
A former science teacher
I just read that correspondence with Dylan. I think if he's still having trouble understanding how such a large group of scientists could unwittingly seek to mislead people he should perhaps reread his first email and ask himself what possessed him to misrepresent his own intentions and position from the outset. When he figures that out he'll have his answer!
Evolution is a religion in every sense of the word. Their Messiah, Charles Darwin, left behind a book; and they've invented an entire dogma and moral code with which to live and worship; but it sure isn't science and the absence of god IS a god. He seems to get a self-serving buzz by tossing you disingenuous compliments on your willingness to present another side of the argument like a priest flagellating himself in some token gesture to open-mindedness. Unfortunately they're cultivating anything but open mindedness and that venomous attitude inevitably rears its ugly head and they start to flinch.
These debates almost never actually involve science, just preaching about what constitutes real science and what does not. Evolution does, you do not!
I guess the veiled intention from the beginning was to take you by the hand and lead you to the fountains of truth where you would hopefully come to the realization on your own that you have no peer reviewed literature to reference. Then you can be reborn.
Nothing feeds the ego like taking it upon yourself to "Mr. Miyagi" an unsuspecting doubter. Wax on!
Tyler and the teacher pity Dylan, viewing him as blind or misguided, but Dylan is proud of what he wrote, as you can see from this email:
Thank you for posting our correspondence, I sincerely hope it will help your readers further their own personal quests for knowledge. Your responses and commentary are rife with conspiracy theories ranging from atheist plot to a corruption of the Nobel prize. Although I tried to explain the scientific method to you, it appears that you have become trapped in a loop of circular logic and still lack an understanding of how science works. Hopefully your readers will understand better as our correspondence has not been for you who devoted his life to debasing science, it's for your website's visitors who seek knowledge.
P.S. Thanks for giving me that (insulting) last word, I'm patting myself on the back. I noticed you slung your fair share of mud too in the commentary. It's ok I can take it.
Dylan just doesnít get it. For example, in this monthís feature article, the authors of the Pike paper said, ďNatural processes usually also cause a disequilibrium between 238U and 234U.Ē Thatís not evidence of a conspiracy. Thatís evidence of scientists not thinking, and blindly accepting what theyíve been told. From their own research, they know that none of their measurements showed anything close to the equilibrium that should exist between 238U and 234U; but they apparently didnít question why. They just blindly accepted the explanation they had heard in the past, and tried to use the disequilibrium to date some cave paintings, even though they had to make incredible assumptions about contamination and unspecified natural processes. And, in one case, they used their assumptions about contamination rather that their actual measured contamination because they did not believe the measured results.
Hereís how real science works: You propose a hypothesis and test it experimentally, then accept or reject the hypothesis based on test results.
Unfortunately, thatís not the modern definition of how science works. Modern ďscienceĒ has devolved to consensus. Whoever can tell the most convincing story is honored as being the discoverer of truth (until a better storyteller comes along).
Dylan doesnít realize how science funding works, either. You donít get paid unless you can get someone to pay you to do the work. The people who dole out the grants pay scientists to come up with evidence of evolution, not evidence of creation. Itís not a conspiracy, itís politics, and itís certainly not science.
|Quick links to|
|Science Against Evolution
|Back issues of
of the Month