Wozza:
it’s the best scientific answer we have. Period. We need go no further as to tbe process. We agree that we have the best scientific answer available.
With evolutionary theories, science oversteps its bounds, those that are imposed by empiricism. That approach to the structure of things works to some degree as far as we are dealing with the simplest - matter, at least allowing us to build some pretty fantastic things. But, when we approach more complex existent forms, different approaches are required.
Let’s jump to the human strata of what is. We have such fields as psychology, sociology, political science and economics, not to mention philosphy and theology, to describe our relationships with reality. These are very much more complex than the simple and still enigmatic workings of matter. To begin to address how we got here, we have to understand who we are, and science cannot explain more than the constituent parts that are brought together as one whole, you and me.
In trying to explain how we got here based on a simplistic understanding of the person, trying to explain the origins of this resulting homunculus, the picture becomes increasingly distorted. The scientific data, although always a work in progress is actually fine with creation, which better puts it all together, but the mythos of our times, which justifies our behaviour towards one another and towards God, is naturally going to be accepted, albeit pseudoscience and untrue.
