>Collins- creation scientist!


   Frances Collins whilst rightly objurgating creation science- early and old earth creationism- remains himself a creation scientist, because  in the wider sense creationism is theism, and all theism contradicts science rather than complementing it. So-called creation scientists mislead with miss-quotes- out of date or out of place whilst the higher theologian-scientists mislead with some misquotes as Marshal notes about Collins and very much so in the case of William Lane Craig [!] and misunderstandings and logical fallacies as Marshall notes about Collins.
      ” Logic is the bane of  theists.” Fr. Griggs
  All theists use the arguments from incredulity and from ignorance. With Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz they use the former with the pseudo-question why is there why is there something rather than nothing with the latter with the pseudo-answer – God.
    Why exists apparent design? No, Lamberth’s the argument from  pareidolia and his teleonomic argument eviscerate that  argument from incredulity and its answer from ignorance  as science reveals only teleonomy at work- no wanted outcomes rather than teleology, and therefore to add divine teleology, besides violating the Ockham with convoluted, ad hoc assumptions,contradicts thereby science rather than complementing it!
     And the pareidolia is that supernaturalists find intent and design when only teleonomy and patterns exist as people find Yeshua in a tortilla or the man in the moon. Scientists are inquiring why and how people see non-existent patterns and designs instead of  real patterns.
      Indeed, as Victor Stenger notes, were there divinity, then matters would be different,but I add, and if the divine  attributes weren’t incoherent and contradictory. As he notes, and in line with Charles Moore’s auto-epistemic rule, here absence of evidence is indeed evidence of absence and therefore no argument from ignorance!
      God is out with phlogiston! We no more need Him than we need gremlins and demons as the Primary Cause [ Thomas Aquinas] and the Ultimate Explanaton [Leibniz- his other blunder].

One comment

  1. Carneades Hume

    >I'm sorry that the color overrides the commentary! Please use a magnifier to read my commentary. Also go to that site to find the entire series on Collins.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s