Also Thankful for True Science Knowledge
by Cowboy Bob Sorensen
Here in the formerly United States, there is currently a great deal of anger and violence happening. This society has been so secularized — indeed, paganized — that many have forgotten the many blessings that our Creator has bestowed. One of these is science.
Made at Pablo |
As we have seen in previous posts and articles, our Creator has given us minds that he expects us to use. We draw inspiration from nature, use what has been given us for our bodily needs, and our thinking can glorify him through logic and science.
Unfortunately, there are many people who claim to have the definition of science, but that can get truly bizarre. In discussions, it is expedient to agree upon a definition of science and work from there, though not ceding to the dictates of a secularist who manipulates definitions for his or her own purposes.
People generally agree that science is the use of evidence so that what is observed in nature can be explained. That is an excellent description of observational science, and it also implies something upon which biblical creationists and secular scientists can (or should) agree: the origin of the universe and the origin of life are beyond the limits of observational science.
However, biblical creationists and others point out that evidence does not "speak for itself", it must be interpreted. People interpret evidence based on their experiences, training, and worldviews. Creationists see evidence for recent creation, but secular scientists are married to the atheistic philosophy of naturalism for the sake of their narrative.
We have science and technology, and are thankful that those are some of the abundant blessings that God has given us. Do not be deceived by false philosophies masquerading as knowledge.
The National Academy of Sciences (NAS) defines science as “the use of evidence to construct testable explanations and predictions of natural phenomena, as well as the knowledge generated through this process.” This definition suggests that evidence should be the foundation for science.But exactly what is evidence? Depending on how it is used, evidence can be an equivocal concept. . . .Evidence, as legally defined, can and many times does depend upon how the observer interprets what is seen or measured. By leaving out the subjectivity wrapped up in evidence, the NAS definition makes science seem more objective than it often is—especially when used to reconstruct past events.
Be thankful that you can read the article by visiting "Science vs. Falsely Called Knowledge".