Over 500 Scientists Proclaim Their Doubts About Darwin’s Theory

Discovery Institute ^ | 02.20.06

[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 PBS’s “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 Institute’s 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 Institute’s 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.

“Darwin’s 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 Institute’s 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 Health’s 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.

[RussP]

Considering that Darwinism is strict orthodoxy in academia today, a fair comparison of numbers requires that you multiply the number of public dissenters by about 10 and divide the number of public supporters by about 5 to get a fair comparison.

[RunningWolf]

Wallcrawlr, The threads aside, I like the articles, thank you for linking me to it.

Yet another article contradicting what the evos tell us.

Let me guess, these are 500 Doctoral Scientists perhaps more qualified than anyone posting on the FR, and yet the evos will dismiss them.

Wolf

[Tamar1973]

Can ID be proven in a laboratory setting? Until then, it can't be touted as science.

Evolution has never been proven in a laboratory either yet Darwinists insists that they have solid science behind them.

[ga medic]

Is your point that Christians are anti-evolution?

[Tamar1973]

Ummm...mutation and natural selection are part of the theory of evolution that Darwin proposed.

The problem is that neither mutations nor natural selection can produce a new kind of animal, only variations within a species. Besides to have a new species, you have to have NEW genetic information implanted. Mutations and natural selection take genetic information away from an organism or damages genetic information already inherent in the organism itself.

Genetics is no friend of evolution

All observational science shows devolution of the species, not evolution of the species.

[ConservaTexan]

No, I am merely pointing out that just because a large number believes something to be true, does not MAKE it true. (No matter what the belief may be) Many darwinists begin to twitch and drool if you even hint that there may be some problems with their theory. Many of the posts here imply that adherents are all thats needed to prove something.

[TBP]

Cool!

[GarySpFc]

Ping

[JavaTheHutt]

And to the point, historically, when scientific ideas have been overthrown they have done so by scientists, not religous organizations/schools of thought.

Yes, and today we see that nearly every scientist worldwide has accepted the theory of evolution as fact, even though it can not be proven by scientific method. Who then is left to question it and possibly prove evolution to be flawed? Certainly not those scientists, they aren't willing to risk ridicule from their peers for even questioning the validity of evolution. It doesn't take a PhD to be able to make a great discovery, just an inquisitive mind and a willingness to explore, which is something you won't find many "scientists" willing to do when it comes to evolution.

[GarySpFc]

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.

Wrong! A couple of years ago it was only 100.

[ga medic]

I guess there is a little of that on both sides. Hence, the article title "Over 500 Scientists Proclaim Their Doubts About Darwin's Theory". and the response, "that is only about 5% of the biologists out there". I agree that science is what it is, whether someone believes it or not. But, those who are not scientists, need to evaluate these competing claims. One way to do it is to see how many are for vs. how many are against.
All Christians are not anti-evolution. Your number of 2.1 Billion also includes about 1 billion Catholics, which are taught that evolution and God do not contradict each other.

[Holdek]

I'm not saying that just because almost all biologists support evolution means evolution is true. But it is a significant factor in where I place my trust in such issues.

On the other side, the creationists (and ID pushers) just don't have ANY science to back themselves up. They don't publish their findings in scientific journals, or do experiments, or put their hypothoses up to the rigor of scientific testing.

It's not hard to decide which one to go with, which one is more credible.

[Holdek]

"even though it can not be proven by scientific method."

That is completely untrue. It has been proven time and time again by experiment and obervation. Please do some research. Thank you.

[JavaTheHutt]

That is completely untrue. It has been proven time and time again by experiment and obervation.

If the theory of evolution has been proven time and time again by experiment and observation, then there would be no debating it's validity. The fact that it's so widely debated is a testament to the innacuracy of your statement and the fallacy of your thought processes.

I've done my research thank you. Nothing I've seen or read has proven to me that evolution should have even been elevated to the level of "theory". At best, it's a hypothesis, with very weak legs to stand on.

[Oztrich Boy]

How many of the Discovery Institute's signatories are named "Steve"?

I may have missed a couple, but i make it three (3)

Oh what the hey, I'll accept Karl Stephan to make it FOUR.

[ConservaTexan]

"They don't publish their findings in scientific journals"

This is like being in a battle of wits against an unarmed opponent! There is one publication you may want to check out, but I won't be "pushy" and mention it by name. You can find one in the nightstand of just about every hotel or motel in the country.

[Holdek]

"If the theory of evolution has been proven time and time again by experiment and observation, then there would be no debating it's validity. The fact that it's so widely debated is a testament to the innacuracy of your statement and the fallacy of your thought processes."

Completely wrong. Again. Evolution is not debated within the scientific community. That should be your first clue. There is a controversy because people who have a fundamentalist belief in religion, whether Christian or Muslim or whatever, don't like the idea of science conflicting with their strongly held belief structure. It's why the Church persecuted Galio for the idea that the Earth orbits the sun, not the other way around.

[Holdek]

I have never in my life encountered a scientific journal in a hotel nightstand.

You do know the difference between the Bible and a scientific journal right?

[Fielding]

IMHO the work that Darwin did was brilliant. His powers of observation were wonderful. These attributes made him a leader in his field. All this doesn't make him right, just brilliant.

[ConservaTexan]

You do know the difference between the Bible and a scientific journal right?

Yes, one is published by man, the other was published for man.