Most Read
Most Commented
Read more like this

From his letter, SK Wong utilised the use of quantum mechanics to explain the origin of the universe. He implied that it is possible for virtual particles to pop into existence from nothingness through "quantum tunneling". As a result, it is also possible for the universe to pop into existence in the same manner. Wong is also of the opinion that the world and its universe are nothing more than a collection of wave-functions

Unfortunately for Wong, quantum mechanics is limited in nature. It is founded on the concept that quantum events occurring in accordance to finite possibilities within finite time intervals. That factor alone negates quantum mechanics' role in explaining the origin of universe since before there was universe, there was no time (or space or energy or matter). Therefore, the origin of time (coincident with that of space, matter and energy) eliminates quantum tunneling as a "creator".

In short, before the existence of the universe, there was no time, space, matter and energy. How. then, can quantum mechanics be applied to explaining the origin of the universe?

That provokes even the likes of Paul Davies, a British physicist - and Wong quotes from him - to change his stand and to argue that the law of physics seem themselves to be the product of an exceedingly ingenious design. ( Superforce: The Search for a Grand Unified Theory of Nature ).

Evolutionists should instead worry about the survival of their theory. In 1991, the Gallup poll showed that 81% of Americans believed that the world was created by a superior power. They also need to worry that authoritative evolutionists are beginning to announce their doubt in the theory openly as with the case of Stephen Jay Gould and neo-Darwinism.

Neo-Darwisnism came about when traditional Darwinism was in danger of dying due to Mendel's Law Of Limited Inheritance (aka Genetics). Darwinism cannot exist without the assumption that inheritance is unlimited while Mendel's Law denies it. To save Darwinism, Ernst Myer took it upon himself to create a new model of evolution called "Neo-Darwinism".

Unfortunately, his successor at Harvard, Stephen Jay Gould, has declared the demise of Neo-Darwinism (in Is a New and General Theory of Evolution Emerging? ). The issue now is where does Darwinism lie now? It's stuck in no-man's land and slowly heading towards oblivion.

It still survives though, not as a scientific fact but more as an ideology spread to people of science via a paradigm imposed upon all of them. Under this paradigm, scientists continue to believe in Darwinism in spite of the apparent lack of empirical evidence. As Thomas Kuhn clearly justifies it by saying:

"To reject one paradigm without substituting another is to reject science itself." ( in The Structure of Scientific Revolutions ).

It looks like religious people are not the only ones relying on faith Evolutionists are also guilty of the same sin. Except their faith is in the form of an ideology disguising itself as various baseless mathematical models. So, to untrained eyes, they see the theory of evolution as being part of the scientific discipline when it is no more than a dogma forced upon people of science.

I pity the Western scientific community. They are stuck between a rock and a hard place. On one end, they are expected to be factual, rational, inquisitive, depending only empirical evidence and embarking on exhaustive experimentation and research routine before deriving a conclusion.

On the other end, as a result of the paradigm they are subjected to, they are suppose to ignore all of the evolution theory's weaknesses, accept it with blind faith, ignore the fact that the theory lacks empirical evidence and strive to create a pretense that the theory has a deep basis in science. They are to operate in a condition whereby conclusions are readily determined for them and their sole purpose of existence is to show that these conclusions are valid. To question the theory is to invite instant reprisal.

To me, such Western double-standard is appalling. Criticism of religion is encouraged while criticism of the evolution theory is suppressed - when they both operate on the same engine, faith. This disguise is nothing more than an implicit conspiracy to get rid of religion in our daily lives and to replace it with another set of faith structure disguised as a scientific theory when it is nothing more then modern-day paganism.

ADS