Posted on 06/22/2006 1:28:41 PM PDT by Tim Long
600 dissenters sign on challenging claims about support for theory
More than 600 scientists holding doctoral degrees have gone on the record expressing skepticism about Darwin's theory of evolution and calling for critical examination of the evidence cited in its support.
All are signatories to the Scientific Dissent From Darwinism statement, which 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 statement, which includes endorsement by members of the prestigious U.S. National Academy of Sciences and Russian Academy of Sciences, was first published by the Seattle-based Discovery Institute in 2001 to challenge statements about Darwinian evolution made in promoting PBS's "Evolution" series.
The PBS promotion claimed "virtually every scientist in the world believes the theory to be true."
The list of 610 signatories includes scientists from National Academies of Science in Russia, Czech Republic, Hungary, India (Hindustan), Nigeria, Poland, Russia and the United States. Many of the signers are professors or researchers at major universities and international research institutions such as Cambridge University, British Museum of Natural History, Moscow State University, Masaryk University in Czech Republic, Hong Kong University, University of Turku in Finland, Autonomous University of Guadalajara in Mexico, University of Stellenbosch in South Africa, Institut de Paleontologie Humaine in France, Chitose Institute of Science & Technology in Japan, Ben-Gurion University in Israel, MIT, The Smithsonian and Princeton.
"Dissent from Darwinism has gone global," said Discovery Institute President Bruce Chapman. "Darwinists used to claim that virtually every scientist in the world held that Darwinian evolution was true, but we quickly started finding U.S. scientists that disproved that statement. Now we're finding that there are hundreds, and probably thousands, of scientists all over the world that don't subscribe to Darwin's theory."
The Discovery Institute is the leading promoter of the theory of Intelligent Design, which has been at the center of challenges in federal court over the teaching of evolution in public school classes. Advocates say it draws on recent discoveries in physics, biochemistry and related disciplines that indicate some features of the natural world are best explained as the product of an intelligent cause rather than an undirected process such as natural selection.
"I signed the Scientific Dissent From Darwinism statement because I am absolutely convinced of the lack of true scientific evidence in favor of Darwinian dogma," said Raul Leguizamon, M.D., pathologist and professor of medicine at the Autonomous University of Guadalajara, Mexico.
"Nobody in the biological sciences, medicine included, needs Darwinism at all," he added. "Darwinism is certainly needed, however, in order to pose as a philosopher, since it is primarily a worldview. And an awful one, as Bernard Shaw used to say."
This was found to be the case with previous so-called "missing link" skulls...
No it wasn't, but thanks for sharing your fantasies with us.
and as a result I am sceptical of anything evolutionists present since.
Then by your own admission, your actually skepticism is based on your unfounded and incorrect presumptions, and has nothing to do with the actual state of the real evidence, of which you seem blisfully unaware.
I look forward to a dialog (almost) anytime.
No it wasn't, but thanks for sharing your fantasies with us.
Uh, yes it was.
But the last thing I expect from evolutionists is an admission of their own embarrassing historic blunders. LOL!
Admitting mistakes is a characteristic of science.
I am still waiting for you to present a brief summary of evolution n your own words.
I love these bag-o-wind "I'm so smart" say nothing responses from evolutionists.
It's typical of the hollow arrogance of the entire theory.
And every time science does it, the creationists contrast how "science keeps changing its story" with "the unchanging nature of The Word." ("Unchanging," that is, since the founding of whatever the One True Church happens to be for somebody.)
I'm still waiting for you to demonstrate you are smart enough to describe evolution in your own words.
Waiting to see natural selection in action placemarker.
It's been thirty minutes now. Long enough to mine some quotes describing evolution and massage them into one's own words.
Remember that someone with your dazzling resume--thanks for posting it, BTW--and your previous vast understanding of evolution could probably provide a level of description thereof better than the standard creationist strawman. So, please, no "Goo to you, via the zoo," or "One day there was this paramecium thing and it turned into a snail and the snail turned into a rat, but where was there a female rat for it to mate with?"
Creationist googling takes longer than that, even when the creo had a 4.8 GPA on a scale of 4.
A 4.0 GPA. That's interesting. Mostly we hear how crappy schools and colleges are, but suddenly they are something to brag about.
Coming up on a big Kansas prime.
Out of my league. In my 30's (my best road races) I was doing very low 7s per mile. (44:13 10K at age 35.) Now 56 and being driven to distraction by foot problems, I'm lucky when I'm not doing 9 per mile. I was lucky in a road race today. 5K in 27:13 on a steambath of a morning.
Does that apply to the number of distinct PhDs you claim? And the number of biotech companies you run?
I think the problem is that in order to replicate with modification, you have to know enough to recognize a credible and concise source.
One hour and counting...
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.