Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Condorman

http://evolution-facts.org/introductory_scientists_speak_about_evolution_1.htm

Included below are a number of admissions by leading evolutionists of earlier decades, such as *Charles Darwin, *Austin Clark, or *Fred Hoyle. The truth is that evolutionists cannot make scientific facts fit the theory.

An asterisk ( * ) by a name indicates that person is NOT known to be a creationist. Of over 4,000 quotations in the set of books this Encyclopedia is based on, only 164 statements are by creationists.


"The Darwinian theory of descent has not a single fact to confirm it in the realm of nature. It is not the result of scientific research, but purely the product of imagination."—*Dr. Fleischman [Erlangen zoologist].

"It is almost invariably assumed that animals with bodies composed of a single cell represent the primitive animals from which all others derived. They are commonly supposed to have preceded all other animal types in their appearance. There is not the slightest basis for this assumption."—*Austin Clark, The New Evolution (1930), pp. 235-236.

"The hypothesis that life has developed from inorganic matter is, at present, still an article of faith."—*J.W.N. Sullivan, The Limitations of Science (1933), p. 95.

"Where are we when presented with the mystery of life? We find ourselves facing a granite wall which we have not even chipped . . We know virtually nothing of growth, nothing of life."—*W. Kaempffert, "The Greatest Mystery of All: The Secret of Life," New York Times.

"'The theory of evolution is totally inadequate to explain the origin and manifestation of the inorganic world.' "—Sir John Ambrose Fleming, F.R.S., quoted in H. Enoch, Evolution or Creation (1966), p. 91 [discoverer of the thermionic valve].

"I think, however, that we must go further than this and admit that the only acceptable explanation is creation. I know that this is anathema to physicists, as indeed it is to me, but we must not reject a theory that we do not like if the experimental evidence supports it."—*H. Lipson, "A Physicist Looks at Evolution," Physics Bulletin, 31 (1980), p. 138.

"I am not satisfied that Darwin proved his point or that his influence in scientific and public thinking has been beneficial . . the success of Darwinism was accomplished by a decline in scientific integrity."—*W.R. Thompson, Introduction to *Charles Darwin's, Origin of the Species [Canadian scientist].

"One of the determining forces of scientism was a fantastic accidental imagination which could explain every irregularity in the solar system without explanation, leap the gaps in the atomic series without evidence [a gap required by the Big Bang theory], postulate the discovery of fossils which have never been discovered, and prophesy the success of breeding experiments which have never succeeded. Of this kind of science it might truly be said that it was `knowledge falsely so called.' "—*David C.C. Watson, The Great Brain Robbery (1976).


400 posted on 04/14/2006 12:19:19 PM PDT by Fruit of the Spirit (No amnesty, no revolution)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 391 | View Replies ]


To: Fruit of the Spirit
"An asterisk ( * ) by a name indicates that person is NOT known to be a creationist."

The FIRSt person on your list (Dr. Fleischman) was a lifelong creationist.

"Austin Clark..."

Writing before (1930) DNA sequencing.

""The hypothesis that life has developed from inorganic matter is, at present, still an article of faith."—*J.W.N. Sullivan, The Limitations of Science (1933), p. 95."

Written in 1933, before any work on abiogensis was done, and also outside of the realm of evolutionary theory anyway as evolution does not deal with the origins of life.

""Where are we when presented with the mystery of life? We find ourselves facing a granite wall which we have not even chipped . . We know virtually nothing of growth, nothing of life.""

Written in the first half of the 20th century, by an astronomer.

""'The theory of evolution is totally inadequate to explain the origin and manifestation of the inorganic world.' "—Sir John Ambrose Fleming, F.R.S., quoted in H. Enoch, Evolution or Creation (1966), p. 91 [discoverer of the thermionic valve]."

From 1905. Should be noted yet again that evolution is not about the origin or manifestation of the inorganic world. The author was a creationist:

"John Ambrose Flemming (1849-1945), was one of the fathers of modern electronics and is most known for developing the first workable electronic vacuum tube. He studied under James Clark Maxwell at Cambridge and served as a consultant for both Marconi and Edison. A former president of the Victoria Institute, he wrote many creationist books including The Intersecting Spheres of Religion and Science, and Evolution or Creation. He was also a long-age creationist and accepted microevolution."
http://www.asa3.org/ASA/resources/CMBergman.html

""I think, however, that we must go further than this and admit that the only acceptable explanation is creation. I know that this is anathema to physicists, as indeed it is to me, but we must not reject a theory that we do not like if the experimental evidence supports it."—*H. Lipson, "A Physicist Looks at Evolution," Physics Bulletin, 31 (1980), p. 138."

What this physicist also said:

"Several people have given clear indications that they do not understand Darwin's theory. The Theory does not merely say that species have slowly evolved: that is obvious from the fossil record."
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/quotes/mine/part1-4.html#quote59

"David C.C. Watson..."

An avowed creationist.
http://www.answersingenesis.org/creation/v13/i1/hunting.asp

Nice quote mining! :) It made for a hilarious read! :)
405 posted on 04/14/2006 12:48:47 PM PDT by CarolinaGuitarman ("There is grandeur in this view of life....")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 400 | View Replies ]

To: Fruit of the Spirit; Dimensio
We already did this list last year: Scientists Speak About Evolution

dimensio answered a couple at post 23

I'm also at a loss to explain why no one on your list is named "Steve." Can you provide an explanation?

Of course nothing in your post is even remotely responsive to my original question: What do you take issue with regarding 1) intraspecies variation, 2) heredity, and 3) unequal reproductive success?

Shall I assume you have nothing coherent to offer?

601 posted on 04/17/2006 10:03:48 AM PDT by Condorman (Prefer infinitely the company of those seeking the truth to those who believe they have found it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 400 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson