Page 182 - The Evolution Impasse 2
P. 182

180  Reductionism



                  parts. You can with equal fa cil i ty mod -  in the me dia and in ac a dem ic sour -
                  el on a Neanderthaloid skull the fea -  ces. Evolutionists may draw and
                  tures of a chim pan zee or the lin e a -  paint im ag i nary be ings, but the lack
                  ments of a phi los o pher. These al leged  of any fos sils be long ing to those
                  res to ra tions of an cient types of man
                                                   crea tures is a ma jor stum bling block
                  have very lit tle if any sci en tif ic val ue
                                                   for them. One of the meth ods of ten
                  and are like ly on ly to mis lead the pub -
                                                   used to re solve this prob lem has
                  lic… So put not your trust in re con -
                                                   been to man u fac ture what ev er fos -
                  struc tions.   201
                                                   sils they have been un a ble to find.
                  The bi ased in ter pre ta tion of fos -
                                                   Piltdown Man, a ma jor scan dal in
               sils and the pro duc tion of fan tas tic
                                                   the his to ry of sci ence, is one in -
               draw ings are ev i dence of how in ten -
                                                   stance. (See  Piltdown Man Fraud,
               sive ly ev o lu tion ists re sort to de cep -
                                                   The.)
               tion. Yet com pared with the var i ous
               con crete frauds that have been per -
               pe trat ed over the past 150 years, REDUCTIONISM
               these pale in to in sig nif i cance.
                                                     Reductionism is the idea that
                  No con crete fos sil ev i dence sup -
                                                   things that do not ap pear ma te ri al
                   ports the pic ture of the ape-man
                                                   can be ex plained in terms of ma te ri -
                          con stant ly  prop a gat ed
                                                   al ef fects. The ma te ri al ist phi los o phy
                                                   un der ly ing the the o ry of ev o lu tion
                                                   as sumes that ev ery thing that ex ists
                                                   con sists  sole ly  of  mat ter.  (See
                                                   Materialism.) According to this phi -
                                                   los o phy, mat ter has ex ist ed for all
                                                   time, and noth ing ex ists apart from
                                                   mat ter. Materialists em ploy a log ic
                                                   known as re duc tion ism to sup port
                                                   these claims.
                                                     For  ex am ple,  the  hu man  mind
                                                   can not be touched or seen. In ad di -
                                        FALSE      tion, the mind is not cen tered any -
                                                   where in the hu man brain. This in ev -
         Reconstructions re -                      i ta bly leads us to con clude that the
         flect on ly the im ag i -
                                                   mind is a su per-ma te ri al con cept. In
         na tion of ev o lu tion -
         ists, not the sci en tif -
                                                               The Evolution Impasse II
         ic facts.
   177   178   179   180   181   182   183   184   185   186   187