Evolution: Theoretic Opium

I'm glad someone clearly states the position of Creationists.
Hardly a day goes buy without the TV spewing Darwinian falsehoods about geographic features like the Grand Canyon being "Millions" of years old when it has been clearly proven that it was created about 4,000 years ago right after the Flood of Noah. Other so called "Theories" that we can clearly see are false such as "Plate Tetonics".
How can we put a stop to Discovery Channel or National Geographic from showing places like the Cave of Crystals in Mexico where they claim that it takes hundreds of thousands of years to grow. Clearly another lie?

I always wondered why people got so enamored with evolution, or perhaps better put - suckered into this horrendous crazy philosophy. Even today many Christians and others who claim to be monotheists either embrace it, or give tacit approval of it, without realizing how offensive it is in the face God. Then I realized it is mostly psychological. People can't get passed the psychological barrier. When the religious leaders saw Jesus in the flesh they saw a man, they could not get passed the psychological barrier, which the scriptures call unbelief.

People are mesmerized by sight. They behold all the world and universe in it's complexity, and size, millions of different species of animals and plant life, and then their heart whispers, "How can anyone even a powerful supreme being bring all this about so quickly? Surely it must have taken billions of years."

Also we don't know how the laws of physics operated before the fall, or rather, how more perfectly they operated before the curse. Mankind trusting in "a science" that is subjected to the fallen nature is not going to be to successful in understanding origins. So then he has to invent things and call them facts.

Getting past the psychological, another snare for anyone convinced of a universe that is billions of years old as a scientific fact, is the unavoidable problem of trusting in current chronological measuring techniques for rocks and fossils, viz, radiometric/carbon dating methods; also the astrophysical techniques of Doppler shifts and the speed of light constant. It is clear that these tools have proven to be somewhat reliable yardsticks in a defective physical world, but not really all that trustworthy in determining origins. There is the crux of the debate. Which is more reliable in validating origins? Current scientific methods of dating? Or the text of revelation and it's critical interpretation? Has the universe remained uniformed without major changes? Or has it gone through a major physical change in makeup and function since being created? Questions that need to be properly answered by both the science and faith communities. I am also personally convinced that both must be inclusive in this search in order to uncover the accurate answers. And that's just the way it is.

Thanks for having a look and making comments on my blog... I wish I had as much blogging talent as you do. Keep it up!

Killian
http://killianlansingh.blogspot.com
PS: Do you have a blogger account?