The revolt against Darwinism

Creation Ministries International ^ | 12-11-14 | John G. Hartnett

[fishtank]

The revolt against Darwinism

by John G. Hartnett

Do you remember the revolt of the scientists against the big bang theory for the origin of the universe? In 2004 a group of 33 leading scientists took out a paid advertisement in New Scientist.1 They titled it ‘Open Letter to the Scientific Community’, basically stating that the big bang theory was fundamentally flawed.

An article copying that appeared on www.rense.com titled ‘Big bang theory busted by 33 top scientists’ (27 May 2004).

The list of names of scientists who agreed with the Statement—that is, disagreed with the theory of a big bang origin of the universe—is available here and many more added their names to that list.

These scientists only agreed on one thing. They were all united in their conviction that the big bang was a bust.

[fishtank]

CMI article image

[fishtank]

Link to the 2004 advertisement and updated list.

http://homepages.xnet.co.nz/~hardy/cosmologystatement.html

[RBStealth]

over at the pier at Huntington Beach, there is a guy or more of them who stands on a soapbox with a fake furry ape next to him. He’s deluded that talking about creationism to throngs of passerbys and tourists is the way to bring people to Christ.
He tries to be entertaining, but telling people to disregard science is not preaching the gospel and hence a weak attempt at evangelization.

[GunRunner]

Silliness. 900 scientists? Whoop tee friggin' doo.

This type of petition style stunt was debunked as unscientific (and dumb) a decade ago:

Project Steve

[txrefugee]

There are millions of believers in Darwin’s doctrine, insisting they have descended from apes. They are harmless unless they try to evangelize in the educational system.

[HiTech RedNeck]

By obscenity you put up a warning sign... for the wise to stay away.

[bert]

drivel

[HiTech RedNeck]

Look in a mirror before talking about drivel. Get that hankie out and wipe your chin.

The creation just stubbornly won’t fit into anything that scientists can come up with. Science is useful, but it isn’t all-defining.

[tomkat]

This is NOT News/Activism

[re_nortex]

Well said, FRiend. Genesis 1:1 has the real explanation straight from He Who Knows.

[HiTech RedNeck]

That is only half the story even yet.

The creation of God is a story of love and choice and a battle with hate.

[Ken H]

Well, I’ll be a monkey’s uncle.

[re_nortex]

Amen and thanks for the reply.

[jdege]

Personally, I have grave doubts about Big Bang cosmology myself. It's based on the simplifying assumption that only gravity matters on a cosmological scale, and I think that is based more on the desire to have a predictable universe than any sound scientific premise.

I lean more towards plasma cosmology.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plasma_cosmology

[GunRunner]

The wise already are immune to these silly stunts.

[Texas Songwriter]

bttt

[GunRunner]

Project Steve already debunked this ridiculousness 10 years ago. There's more scientists named "Steve" on the Project Steve list who recognize the scientific facts of evolition than all of the pseudoscientists on the "Dissent from Darwin" list.

It's a scam, and anyone who falls for it is an ignoramus.

[Tucker39]

More likely, his nephew.......if you buy that silliness.

Poor old Darwin hadn’t a clue about microscopic life; thought a cell was much like a little gob of jello. The science of genetics, DNA, etc. knocks the whole evolution scam into a cocked hat for me.

Information does not come about by happenstance. The CODED information in one cell, if unwound and printed out in book form, would fill 1,000 volumes of 600 pages each. Check it out.