Skip to comments.
Over 500 Scientists Proclaim Their Doubts About Darwin’s Theory
Discovery Institute ^
| 02.20.06
Posted on 02/20/2006 7:57:31 PM PST by Coleus
The Scientific Dissent From Darwinism list is now located at a new webpage, www.dissentfromdarwin.org.
SEATTLE Over 500 doctoral scientists have now signed a statement publicly expressing their skepticism about the contemporary theory of Darwinian evolution.
The statement reads: We are skeptical of claims for the ability of random mutation and natural selection to account for the complexity of life. Careful examination of the evidence for Darwinian theory should be encouraged.
The list of 514 signatories includes member scientists from the prestigious US and Russian National Academy of Sciences. Signers include 154 biologists, the largest single scientific discipline represented on the list, as well as 76 chemists and 63 physicists. Signers hold doctorates in biological sciences, physics, chemistry, mathematics, medicine, computer science, and related disciplines. Many are professors or researchers at major universities and research institutions such as MIT, The Smithsonian, Cambridge University, UCLA, UC Berkeley, Princeton, the University of Pennsylvania, the Ohio State University, the University of Georgia, and the University of Washington.
Discovery Institute first published its Scientific Dissent From Darwinism list in 2001 to challenge false statements about Darwinian evolution made in promoting PBSs Evolution series. At the time it was claimed that virtually every scientist in the world believes the theory to be true.
Darwinists continue to claim that no serious scientists doubt the theory and yet here are 500 scientists who are willing to make public their skepticism about the theory, said Dr. John G. West, associate director of Discovery Institutes Center for Science & Culture. Darwinist efforts to use the courts, the media and academic tenure committees to suppress dissent and stifle discussion are in fact fueling even more dissent and inspiring more scientists to ask to be added to the list.
According to West, it was the fast growing number of scientific dissenters which encouraged the Institute to launch a website -- www.dissentfromdarwin.org -- to give the list a permanent home. The website is the Institutes response to the demand for information and access to the list both by the public, and by scientists who want to add their name to list.
Darwins theory of evolution is the great white elephant of contemporary thought, said Dr. David Berlinski, one of the original signers, a mathematician and philosopher of science with Discovery Institutes Center for Science and Culture (CSC). It is large, almost completely useless, and the object of superstitious awe.
Other prominent signatories include U.S. National Academy of Sciences member Philip Skell; American Association for the Advancement of Science Fellow Lyle Jensen; evolutionary biologist and textbook author Stanley Salthe; Smithsonian Institution evolutionary biologist and a researcher at the National Institutes of Healths National Center for Biotechnology Information Richard von Sternberg; Editor of Rivista di Biologia / Biology Forum --the oldest still published biology journal in the world-- Giuseppe Sermonti; and Russian Academy of Natural Sciences embryologist Lev Beloussov.
TOPICS: Culture/Society
KEYWORDS: crevolist; darwin; darwinism; discoveryinstitute; id; intelligentdesign; science; scientists
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80 ... 221-229 next last
To: Prost1
Just good ol' logic. Science cannot say not demonstrate where intelligence comes from. Talk to me in 500,000 years, or perhaps 150 year's to see if intelligence is a survival trait offering advantages over the millions of years of the thunder lizards.
41
posted on
02/20/2006 8:36:34 PM PST
by
MilspecRob
(Most people don't act stupid, they really are.)
To: EricT.
The Church of Darwinism gets really bent out of shape when proclaimations get nailed to their door. Well put!
To: Holdek
When you consider that pretty much every biologist has based his/her career upon evolutionary theory and they would do their utmost to defend that upon which their professions are based, these 154 are people of courage.
43
posted on
02/20/2006 8:38:48 PM PST
by
My2Cents
("The essence of American journalism is vulgarity divested of truth." -- Winston Churchill)
To: Strategerist
And, of course, truth is determined by majority vote.
44
posted on
02/20/2006 8:40:07 PM PST
by
My2Cents
("The essence of American journalism is vulgarity divested of truth." -- Winston Churchill)
To: Coleus
Darwins theory of evolution is the great white elephant of contemporary thought, said Dr. David Berlinski, one of the original signers, a mathematician and philosopher of science with Discovery Institutes Center for Science and Culture (CSC). It is large, almost completely useless, and the object of superstitious awe. Hammer - nail.
To: g_suvorov
Can ID be proven in a laboratory setting?I thought the scientific method was based on falsification of hypotheses.
46
posted on
02/20/2006 8:41:22 PM PST
by
delacoert
(imperat animus corpori, et paretur statim: imperat animus sibi, et resistitur. -AUGUSTINI)
To: connectthedots
And his proof of this is...?
It's an unsupported statement. If evolution is a white elephant, let him back that claim up.
To: My2Cents
Oh I don't doubt that they are courageous. But they are also very wrong. Until they provide some proof and hard evidence, the idea that evolution is not true will continue to remain on the fringe.
48
posted on
02/20/2006 8:42:21 PM PST
by
Holdek
To: EricT.
49
posted on
02/20/2006 8:42:37 PM PST
by
Ghost of Philip Marlowe
(Liberals are blind. They are the dupes of Leftists who know exactly what they're doing.)
To: delacoert
Correct. I should have said proven or disproven. Either way, ID can't fit the bill.
To: Coleus
"Careful examination of the evidence for Darwinian theory should be encouraged.
The religious followers of Darwin want us, like the Muslims do, to believe in their faith or else. There is only suggestions of evolution, not proof, but they want evolution to be scientific fact by law and religion banned.
51
posted on
02/20/2006 8:51:56 PM PST
by
CodeToad
To: JCEccles
"If scientists did not fear for their livelihoods and reputations, this list would be VASTLY larger."
I believe this to be a correct statement. Based upon the tone of ardent proponents of evolutionary theory, like "Right-Wing Professor", that are in academia. I would suspect that many would never risk expressing any doubts publically. BTW - I don't mean to pick on RWP, it is just he has made it perfectly clear that he has zero tolerance for anyone in "science" that doesn't agree with what he considers settled dogma. IF is is representative of others in academia, then it would be a career killer to stand up.
52
posted on
02/20/2006 8:54:25 PM PST
by
Sola Veritas
(Trying to speak truth - not always with the best grammar or spelling)
To: CodeToad
What on Earth are you talking about?
53
posted on
02/20/2006 8:55:28 PM PST
by
Holdek
To: CodeToad
The religious followers of Darwin want us, like the Muslims do, to believe in their faith or else. There is only suggestions of evolution, not proof, but they want evolution to be scientific fact by law and religion banned. I take offense to this statement, as would most others on this thread who believe in the scientific theory of evolution. None of us want religion to be banned. That's just ridiculous.
Personally, I think ID belongs in a comparative religion class or a philosophy class. It's not science.
To: JCEccles
Brave men. The grand exalted priesthood of Darwin will surely not tolerate this dissent from revealed truth. There will be purges and inquisitions at at least some of these institutions of "higher" learning. How very postmodernist of you. :-)
In [pro-ID professor Steven] Fuller's mind, working scientists are in an important sense intellectually deformed. They constitute a narrow, cloistered, inbred hierarchy of myopic specialists largely blind to the "true" nature of science and oblivious to its future trajectory. Science, on this view, maintains its prestige, authority, and access to resources by playing the power game, bullying and intimidating the rest of society. It is "an arrested social movement in which the natural spread of knowledge is captured by a community that gains relative advantage by forcing other communities to rely on its expertise to get what they want." In other words, what we now think of as "science" does not truly comprehend nature, but rather constructs from its own idiosyncratic perspective a limited image of nature, while using the prerogatives of a privileged mandarinate to nullify or suppress all rival knowledge claims that impinge on its territory.
From
this article.
55
posted on
02/20/2006 8:57:43 PM PST
by
jennyp
(WHAT I'M READING NOW: The Chicago Manual of Style, 14th ed.)
To: Coleus
56
posted on
02/20/2006 8:58:16 PM PST
by
Jacobis
To: Sola Veritas
The idea that scientists really don't believe in evolution but are just "too afraid" to say so is bunk. Scientists are a competitive lot who live on the cutting edge, who dedicate their existence to challenging ways of thinking and discovering new things. If any of them found some sort of proof that unsettled Darwin, they would publish it. Everyone wants to be the next Einstein-toppling-Newton.
57
posted on
02/20/2006 8:58:45 PM PST
by
Holdek
To: Jacobis
Ummm...mutation and natural selection are part of the theory of evolution that Darwin proposed.
To: SteveMcKing
Woehler dispelled this about 1828.
59
posted on
02/20/2006 9:01:09 PM PST
by
Doctor Stochastic
(Vegetabilisch = chaotisch ist der Charakter der Modernen. - Friedrich Schlegel)
To: Coleus
My, it seems only a couple of years ago when it was 500 and now it's 514. Maybe by 2010 there'll be 600.
60
posted on
02/20/2006 9:01:22 PM PST
by
edsheppa
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80 ... 221-229 next last
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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson