[_ Old Earth _] Creationist End Game

[Deep Thought]

Let's imagine for one moment, that Creation Science is made mandatory in all forms of education and research. What benefits do Creationists think/hope would come from this scenario?

 

[Barbarian]

The answer is in the Wedge document of the Discovery Institute:

Design theory promises to reverse the stifling dominance of the materialist worldview, and to replace it with a science consonant with Christian and theistic convictions.

In short, they hope to make a belief in God mandatory if one is to do science. Anyone who actually does science knows how absurd that it; you might as well hope that belief in God is necessary to fix a lawn mower.

But these are guys with an obsession; reality is merely a temporary difficulty as far as they are concerned.

 

[Bryce]

I disagree completely Barbarian, I'm surprised you would say somthing so ..Ridiculous?
The awnser is in the past,
Look how life was before the Evolution and Big Bang theory, or at least until it became a major part in our schools.

 

[Deep Thought]

Bryce, the difference being that before modern science people didn't have the knowledge and understanding of things like evolution, cosmology, plate tectonics, genetics etc.

 

[Barbarian]

I disagree completely Barbarian, I'm surprised you would say somthing so ..Ridiculous?

Granted, the Wedge Document was supposed to be seen only by the insiders, but it's out. No point in denying what it says.

The awnser is in the past, Look how life was before the Evolution and Big Bang theory, or at least until it became a major part in our schools.

Pretty bad stuff, um? Racism, violence, etc. In Darwin's time, things were pretty grim unless you were a wealthy white male. Homicides were higher, white slavery of young girls was a common thing, and chattel slavery was considered by many to be God's way.
http://www.salvationarmysouth.org/booth/v2-4.htm

Victorians were worried about the rising crime rate: offences went up from about 5,000 per year in 1800 to about 20,000 per year in 1840.
http://www.ourwardfamily.com/1800's_britain.htm

About 17.9 million people, or about 112 per hundred thousand people.

Compare to our current rates, about 5.6 per hundred thousand people.

Thank God, things have gotten better. Not that Darwin was entirely responsible, but he did his part. He opposed slavery, and advocated education and care to help the poor gain a place in society.

The aid which we feel impelled to give to the helpless is mainly an incidental result of the instinct of sympathy, which was originally acquired as part of the social instincts, but subsequently rendered, in the manner previously indicated, more tender and more widely diffused. Nor could we check our sympathy, even at the urging of hard reason, without deterioration in the noblest part of our nature. The surgeon may harden himself whilst performing an operation, for he knows that he is acting for the good of his patient; but if we were intentionally to neglect the weak and helpless, it could only be for a contingent benefit, with an overwhelming present evil.

Interestingly, even IDers reluctantly agree that this is an important part of Darwinism. From the website of IDer William Dembski:

Darwin wasn’t arguing FOR eugenics. He was arguing that while eugenics would theoretically work it would require that we degrade the noblest part of our natures to do it, that part which DOES distinguish us from our non-human mammalian relatives.

If there’s any real case to be made for Darwin and the holocaust it’s the opposite of what’s messaged in Expelled. The holocaust resulted from a failure to heed Darwin’s warning that eugenics could only be practiced by sacrificing the noblest part of our nature, the very part and only part that separates us from other animals. Those responsible for the holocaust, beginning with the eugenics movement in America, were the true animals. Those opposed were nobler than the animals.
http://www.uncommondescent.com/intellig ... anslation/

BTW, when evolutionary theory combined with genetics, Darwinists showed that eugenics wasn't even feasible.