![]() |
![]() |
Evolution Dictionary: Definition Of The Terms Used By Evolutionism |
Definition of Words Used by EvolutionistsConvergence: a desperate effort from evolutionists to keep creatures under the evolutionary umbrella. Evolution: a term used to confuse the public through equivocation. In mid-thought, sometimes in mid-sentence, the skilled Evolutionism evangelist will switch the meaning of the word. The most common method is to start by speaking about the common variations that occur within a kind of animal, say, a dog or a finch. That ability to adapt already exists in massive computer program that makes decisions with every living cell. We can actually use science to observe these variations. Then the Evolutionist deceptively use the same term, evolution, to speak of a never-observed unscientific concept that claims that there is some way that information could be added to the gene by random processes, using the first meaning of evolution to appear to "prove" the second meaning of evolution. If the student is unaware of the laws of logic or is not very alert, they will be fooled by this bait and switch magic trick. Natural Selection: An untested notion (it needs no testing, they say, since it is just true) that nature selects the fittest as a way to advance Evolution. Of course living things can be so weak that they never reproduce and are thus eliminated, which is really a rough sketch of what Natural Selection really is. However, there are two deceptions associated with Natural Selection. First, Evolutionists attribute god-like qualities to Natural Selection. Second, Evolutionists use Natural Selection and Mutation as a way of misdirection away from the real problem, which is that there is no way to add information to the DNA by natural processes. Such adding of information has never been observed, so they bring up many examples of mutations where information is lost or duplicated or mutilated and claim that information has been added when, in fact, information has not been added. There is no agree-upon definition among Evolutionists of what this term, Natural Selection, means. The term, selection, implies that something makes intelligent decisions. If Evolutionists are challenged on this, they say, "It's just a figure of speech." Then they use the term as if they are talking about a substitute for God. That is exactly what they are doing. The whole concept has not been tested scientifically, and the entire molecules-to-man evolution conjecture / fabrication rests on this term that can change meanings at any moment. (see video below) Science: The word, science, has gotten a good reputation because of the advances of a type of science called operational science. This type of science is limited to the things that can be observed in the present. Some things cannot be observed in the present, such as the past or the future. Other things cannot be observed, at least not right now. For instance, love, joy, God, angels, heaven, hell, etc. So science is a good thing, but has it's limits. When Evolutionists use the word, science to mean operational science in one part of a sentence and then use the same word, science, to mean something quite different in another part of the sentence, that is trickery. It is known as equivocation, an it is deceptive. Evolutionists use the word, science, for operational science, the kind of science that allows repeated testing and observation. Then, they use the term, science, to also mean historical science. Evolution is historical science. You cannot replay history repeatedly to perform many observations as you can with operational science. Evolutionists are prone to say that Naturalism, Materialism, and Uniformitarianism are part of science. Naturalism, Materialism, and Uniformitarianism are NOT testable by science since they all commit the same logical falacy. They claim the non-existance of something. In order to prove the non-existence of anything would require that the person making the claim would know everything about everything. It would require that the person making the claim would be God. There are a vast number of terms that should be defined here, but this gives you some idea as to how serious the problem is.
Author/Compiler Last updated: Apr, 2013 ![]() Bread Crumbs Main Foundations Home Meaning Bible Dictionary History Toons & Vids Quotations Similar
What Are The Two Definitions Of Evolution And Why Is It Critical That We Understand Them? Evolution Dictionary: Definition Of The Terms Used By Evolutionism How is the presentation of evolution similar to the performance of a magic trick? Related DeceptionRecent
Home Answer to Critic Appeal to Possibility Circular Reasoning Argument to the Future Insignificant Cause Word Magic Love Between a Man and Woman Author/Compiler Colossians 2 Righteousness & Holiness Don't Compromise Sin Proof by Atheism Scriptures About Marriage Genuine Authority The Reason for Rejecting Truth Witness on the Internet Flaky Human Reasoning How Do You Know? Featured
The Real Purpose of the Church The Real Purpose of Life From Glory to Glory REAL Faith--What it IS & IS NOT REAL Love--What it IS & IS NOT How to be Led by God How to Witness Wisdom: Righteousness & Reality Holiness & Mind/Soul Redemption: Free From Sin Real Reality Stories Versus Revelation Understanding Logic Logical Fallacies Circular Reasoning-Who is Guilty? How Can We Know Anything? God's Word God's Process God's Pattern Mind Designed to Relate to God Answers for the Confused Fossil Record Says: "Creation" Avoid These Pitfalls Public School's Religion Twisting Science Evolutionism Public School Failures Twisting History |
![]() |
![]() |