Picture of Lysenko giving a speech attacking Evolution with every Creationists number one Hero, Joe Stalin, gazing approvingly on.
Posted on 07/20/2005 9:13:07 AM PDT by Michael_Michaelangelo
SEATTLE — More than 400 scientists have signed onto a growing list from all disciplines who are “skeptical of claims for the ability of random mutation and natural selection to account for the complexity of life.”
“Darwin’s theory of evolution is the great white elephant of contemporary thought,” said Dr. David Berlinski, a mathematician and philosopher of science with Discovery Institute’s Center for Science and Culture (CSC). “It is large, almost completely useless, and the object of superstitious awe.”
Discovery Institute first published its Statement of Dissent from Darwin in 2001 and a direct challenge to statements made in PBS’ “Evolution” series that no scientists disagreed with Darwinian evolution.
“The fact is that a significant number of scientists are extremely skeptical that Darwinian evolution can explain the origins of life,” said Dr. John G. West, associate director of the CSC. “We expect that as scientists engage in the wider debate over materialist evolutionary theories, this list will continue to grow, and grow at an even more rapid pace than we’ve seen this past year.”
In the last 90 days, 29 scientists, including eight biologists, have signed the “Scientific Dissent From Darwinism.”. The list includes over 70 biologists total.
The most recent signatories are Lev V. Beloussov and Vladimir L. Voeikov, two prominent, Russian biologists from Moscow State University. Dr. Voeikov is a professor of bioorganic chemistry and Dr. Beloussov is a professor of embryology and Honorary Professor at Moscow State University; both are members of the Russian Academy of Natural Sciences.
“The ideology and philosophy of neo-Darwinism which is sold by its adepts as a scientific theoretical foundation of biology seriously hampers the development of science and hides from students the field’s real problems,” said Professor Voeikov.
“Lately in the media there’s been a lot of talk about science versus religion,” said West. “But such talk is misleading. This list is a witness to the growing group of scientists who challenge Darwinian theory on scientific grounds.”
Other prominent biologists who have signed the list include evolutionary biologist and textbook author Dr. Stanley Salthe, Dr. Richard von Sternberg an evolutionary biologist at the Smithsonian Institution and the National Institutes of Health’s National Center for Biotechnology Information, and Giuseppe Sermonti, Editor of Rivista di Biologia / Biology Forum. The list also includes scientists from Princeton, Cornell, UC Berkeley, UCLA, Ohio State University, Purdue and University of Washington among others.
Oh, wait....
ping
"So it's all a numbers game. When enough scientists are brave enough to come over to the other side, then the debate will heat up."
Maybe. Darwin was effectively alone when he proposed his theory, and roundly critized by the scientists of his day.
As the "Steve" list shows, these efforts are stupid and misleading.
And there are those who believe the evolution crap. But there are many more who don't.
The way I see it, more and more scientists are speaking out because in today's environment it's *okay* to do so (thanks in part to the ID movement). I fully expect more to do so in the next few years.
We need to keep the argument straight here cuz the term evolution is very broad. Nearly all scientists believe that evolution can explain the variations within species. There is very little evidence that natural selection can explain how a fish could turn into a cow or even a human. The intermediate species just don't exist...even considering the limited fossil record we have. There should be several intermediate examples out there. All we have is archeoptryx...not much IMHO.
But the real zinger is how complex even the simplest life forms are. To randomly create even the simplest life form would be, as some say, like having a tornado go through a junkyard and produce a 747. Not in a billion billion billion years. Forget it, no way, nada, yah right.
God created life....get over it sceptics.
More than 400 scientists have signed onto a growing list from all disciplines who are “skeptical of claims for the ability of random mutation and natural selection to account for the complexity of life.”
I'm not sure that I even have a horse in this race, since while the theory of evolution makes sense to me, I find the idea of ID rather appealing too, if not exactly provable.
But the idea that the complexity of life cannot be explained by random natural selection is dead wrong, IMO. The fact is that random natural selection is probably the only thing that convincingly explains such complexity. It is Central Planning, OTOH, that cannot account for it.
Thanks for your input! You'll be happy to know that today I shall donate more money to both Jim *and* Discovery.org, in your name.
FRegards!
Picture of Lysenko giving a speech attacking Evolution with every Creationists number one Hero, Joe Stalin, gazing approvingly on.
Of course God created life.
He apparently chose to so via natural selection.
Are you saying that is so complex a task God could not have done it?!
I find your lack of faith in God's abilities shocking.
G.K. Chesterton's "Everlasting Man" pretty much eviscerated Darwinism long before the ID community came into existence.
I feel sorry for people who believe ignorance of science is a virtue. No wait --- on second thought, no I don't.
What are you talking about?
In addition, I just hope that FreeRepublic is not destroyed and marginalized by these Trolls that are attacking us from within by posting this crap.
Any one interested in a weekly internet Radio show that goes over the weekly scientfic discoverys that point to a creator check out www.reasons.org
No.
Just high on something.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.