The Fight isn't between Science and Religion, But Worldviews.

I believe it is not religion we should first define, But science. What is science? Science is observation and experimentation. We all know that, Of course. The key word is observation. We Christians do believe in observational science! Airplanes, Medicine, And technology. These triumphs exist in the present and can therefore be the subjects of examination and investigation. The other science, Which we are debating, Is called "historical science". Historical science is the process of using the methods of science in the present to determine what happened in the past. Since the physical world exists in the present, All the evidence a scientist has available to examine the physical world also exists in the present. The scientist has no method to examine directly the past, Thus he must make assumption in order to come to conclusions. However, Assumptions are unproven, And generally unprovable, Beliefs. Assumptions are no more than untestable guesses. Things that happened in the past are just that, Past. They cannot be observed or tested in the present. They cannot be repeated or verified in the present. Then, You ask, How do we know so much about the past? Let me use an example: Do you think George Washington was a real person? You would say, "Of course. " I would then ask if you could prove his existence scientifically by using an experimental procedure. You would say to test his DNA or dig up his bones. However, This won't work. DNA testing would only work if you already had a valid sample of his DNA to use as comparison. To dig up his bones won't work either. In order to make conclusions, You would have to make some assumptions based on things you could not actually test. If there is no scientific way to prove his existence then how to we do it? Historical documents written by people who lived in that day and are not disputed. So we have the evidence that he walked the earth. When asked if anyone has seen one creature turn into another, The answer is always no. Of course you will counter that the process is too slow to be seen. Well, If the process is so slow, Then how can we be sure it happened at all? No one was there to record it or test it or repeat it. Especially not in the present. Any conclusions that are made are not testable. Ernst Mayr, A well known evolutionist in the 20th century said, "Evolutionary biology, In contrast with physics and chemistry, Is an historical science - the evolutionist attempts to explain events and processes that have already taken place. Laws and experiments are inappropriatwe techniques for the explication of such events and processes. Instead one constructs a historical narrative, Consisting of a tentative reconstruction of the particular scenario that led to the events one is trying to explain. " He then says amazingly, "No educated person any longer questions the validity of the so-called theory of evolution, Which we know know to be a simple fact. Dr. Michael Ruse wrote in National Post: "Evolution is promoted by its practitioners as more than mere science. Evolution is promulgated as an ideology, A secular religion - a full-fledged alternative to Christianity, With meaning and morality. . . . Evolution is a religion. This was true of evolution in the beginning, And it is true of evolution still today. " Let us test your claim that evolution is not a religion. If something isn't religious, Then it cannot oppose religious claims. Does your origins view oppose the religious claim of special creation by God and 6 days and subsequently a young Earth? Yes. Thus, Secular views are religious. Anyone who claims that they are not religious and then makes judgments about religious topics has made a religious statement. Though you may claim to be irreligious, You show that you are religious when you try to refute another religious view. Does atheism, Which says there is no God, Oppose the religious claim that God exists? Again, Yes. Thus, Atheism is religious. It is easy to prove that humanistic religions are religious. The US Supreme Court, In Torcaso v. Watkins, Stated the following: "Among religions in this country which do not teach what would generally be considered a belief in the existence of God, Are Buddhism, Taoism, Ethical culture, Secular humanism, And others. " Additionally, These groups are eligible for the same tax benefits as other religious groups, And secular and atheist chaplains even function within the military. You can't have your cake and eat it too. Humanists are religious and they act in religious ways. Science is not strictly secular.