The Columbus Dispatch editorial writers have been at it again. This time, while writing about the John Freshwater case, they have taken it upon themselves to solve the hotly debated topic of origins.
It turns out, according to the gurus at the Dispatch, that the evolutionists have been right all along. We did evolve from the cosmic ooze.
The Dispatch said, “While there are scientific debates about the specific mechanisms of evolution, evolution itself is a scientific fact.”
In other words, the Dispatch doesn’t have a clue how life got from the first self-replicating molecule to highly complex human beings. It just happened. Believe.
Far be it from me to doubt a Dispatch editorial, especially one with the religious sounding title “Judgment day.”
However, I am having trouble reconciling the Dispatch’s claim that evolution is a scientific fact with the Dispatch’s own definition of science:
“Science, by definition, is the study of natural processes, not supernatural ones. Any theory that invokes supernatural explanations for natural phenomena is not science, it is religion, and therefore is inappropriate in a science class.”
Wouldn’t that mean that evolution is religion?
If the “specific mechanisms” (the natural processes) of evolution are unknown, then evolution has not invoked any explanation. To accept evolution as fact is a “leap of faith.”
That’s so religious of the Dispatch.
“School Board’s Expert Witness: Debating Is for Politics, Not Science”
“Evolution – Is It More Speculative Philosophy than It Is Science?”
“Shame on The Columbus Dispatch”
See the articles in the archive for additional coverage of the Freshwater controversy.