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

Skip to comments.

Why Darwinism Is Doomed
WorldNetDaily ^ | 09/27/2006 | Jonathan Wells

Posted on 09/27/2006 9:56:09 AM PDT by SirLinksalot

Why Darwinism is doomed

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Posted: September 27, 2006 1:00 a.m. Eastern

By Jonathan Wells, Ph.D.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

© 2006

Harvard evolutionary biologist Stephen Jay Gould wrote in 1977: "Biology took away our status as paragons created in the image of God." Darwinism teaches that we are accidental byproducts of purposeless natural processes that had no need for God, and this anti-religious dogma enjoys a taxpayer-funded monopoly in America's public schools and universities. Teachers who dare to question it openly have in many cases lost their jobs.

The issue here is not "evolution" – a broad term that can mean simply change within existing species (which no one doubts). The issue is Darwinism – which claims that all living things are descended from a common ancestor, modified by natural selection acting on random genetic mutations.

According to Darwinists, there is such overwhelming evidence for their view that it should be considered a fact. Yet to the Darwinists' dismay, at least three-quarters of the American people – citizens of the most scientifically advanced country in history – reject it.

A study published Aug. 11 in the pro-Darwin magazine Science attributes this primarily to biblical fundamentalism, even though polls have consistently shown that half of the Americans who reject Darwinism are not biblical fundamentalists. Could it be that the American people are skeptical of Darwinism because they're smarter than Darwinists think?

On Aug. 17, the pro-Darwin magazine Nature reported that scientists had just found the "brain evolution gene." There is circumstantial evidence that this gene may be involved in brain development in embryos, and it is surprisingly different in humans and chimpanzees. According to Nature, the gene may thus harbor "the secret of what makes humans different from our nearest primate relatives."

Three things are remarkable about this report. First, it implicitly acknowledges that the evidence for Darwinism was never as overwhelming as its defenders claim. It has been almost 30 years since Gould wrote that biology accounts for human nature, yet Darwinists are just now turning up a gene that may have been involved in brain evolution.

Second, embryologists know that a single gene cannot account for the origin of the human brain. Genes involved in embryo development typically have multiple effects, and complex organs such as the brain are influenced by many genes. The simple-mindedness of the "brain evolution gene" story is breathtaking.

Third, the only thing scientists demonstrated in this case was a correlation between a genetic difference and brain size. Every scientist knows, however, that correlation is not the same as causation. Among elementary school children, reading ability is correlated with shoe size, but this is because young schoolchildren with small feet have not yet learned to read – not because larger feet cause a student to read better or because reading makes the feet grow. Similarly, a genetic difference between humans and chimps cannot tell us anything about what caused differences in their brains unless we know what the gene actually does. In this case, as Nature reports, "what the gene does is a mystery."

So after 150 years, Darwinists are still looking for evidence – any evidence, no matter how skimpy – to justify their speculations. The latest hype over the "brain evolution gene" unwittingly reveals just how underwhelming the evidence for their view really is.

The truth is Darwinism is not a scientific theory, but a materialistic creation myth masquerading as science. It is first and foremost a weapon against religion – especially traditional Christianity. Evidence is brought in afterwards, as window dressing.

This is becoming increasingly obvious to the American people, who are not the ignorant backwoods religious dogmatists that Darwinists make them out to be. Darwinists insult the intelligence of American taxpayers and at the same time depend on them for support. This is an inherently unstable situation, and it cannot last.

If I were a Darwinist, I would be afraid. Very afraid.

Get Wells' widely popular "Politically Incorrect Guide to Darwinism and Intelligent Design"

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Jonathan Wells is the author of "The Politically Incorrect Guide™ to Darwinism and Intelligent Design" (Regnery, 2006) and Icons of Evolution (Regnery, 2000). He holds a Ph.D. in biology from the University of California at Berkeley and a Ph.D. in theology from Yale University. Wells is currently a senior fellow at the Discovery Institute in Seattle


TOPICS: Culture/Society; Editorial; Philosophy
KEYWORDS: backwardsthinking; crevolist; darwinism; darwinismhasfailed; doomed; evofury; fishwithfeet; headinsand; pepperedmoths; scaredevos; wearealldoomedputz; whyreligionisdoomed; wingnutdaily
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 961-980981-1,0001,001-1,020 ... 1,181-1,195 next last
To: taxesareforever

She did not outright state that she had converted to Christianity. Moreover, Al Simmons's statement is still not invalidated if he was speaking of events that transpired before 2003, and you have provided no evidence to show that he was speaking of a later time.


981 posted on 09/30/2006 11:34:13 PM PDT by Dimensio (http://angryflower.com/bobsqu.gif <-- required reading before you use your next apostrophe!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 921 | View Replies]

To: Al Simmons

It is called narcisism, where a person does not see anyone else as anything but a cardboard cutout.

Other people are not real to them, we are all here for their specific enjoyment, and if we hurt them in any way shape or form, it is not because they might have done something wrong, it is because we are awful people, and just don't understand them.

They are perfect, and no one can tell them otherwise.

I have known a few sick freaks of this persuasion, a number of them have put a gun to their head and pulled the trigger.

No big loss as far as I am concerned.


982 posted on 09/30/2006 11:35:25 PM PDT by Jaguarbhzrd
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 979 | View Replies]

To: Al Simmons

Come on. Only 18 more to go!


983 posted on 09/30/2006 11:35:53 PM PDT by presently no screen name
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 979 | View Replies]

To: Gargantua
The Theory of Evolution is just as much a Faith-based religion as is Christianity, with the exception that there is far more historical proof of Jesus than of Darwins' disproved 'primordial soup'...(snicker!).

When did Darwin make any statements about "primordial soup"? It would appear that you have not actually studied the subject of evolution, which calls into question your qualification on claiming that any part of it is "doomed" -- your credibility rendered even more questionable when you criticize elements of it that it does not actually posess.
984 posted on 09/30/2006 11:36:05 PM PDT by Dimensio (http://angryflower.com/bobsqu.gif <-- required reading before you use your next apostrophe!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 925 | View Replies]

To: js1138
Therefore, he knows that evolution can only be anti-religious in the same sense that all of science is anti-religious.

Overstatement placemarker.

985 posted on 09/30/2006 11:36:09 PM PDT by grey_whiskers
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 471 | View Replies]

To: presently no screen name

Are you talking behind my back? Ugh?


986 posted on 09/30/2006 11:37:33 PM PDT by stultorum (dont hire illegal aliens)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 980 | View Replies]

To: presently no screen name
Its getting REAL late because I actually spent 5 minutes trying to figure out what you meant by '18 more to go'!!!

Looks like a fresh crew has arrived, we might even make it by midnight (Pacific time)...

987 posted on 09/30/2006 11:40:36 PM PDT by Al Simmons
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 983 | View Replies]

To: Gargantua

Do you believe that "Make that extra crispy, please..." constitutes a valid, logical argument?


988 posted on 09/30/2006 11:41:28 PM PDT by Dimensio (http://angryflower.com/bobsqu.gif <-- required reading before you use your next apostrophe!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 927 | View Replies]

To: Jaguarbhzrd
They are perfect, and no one can tell them otherwise.

I think 'they' know otherwise but don't want anyone else to know it.

I feel it is a big loss. It's OK to be wrong, to screw up. I'm sure they wish they could jump out of their skin and feel free.
989 posted on 09/30/2006 11:46:09 PM PDT by presently no screen name
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 982 | View Replies]

To: finnman69
Its not opinion. The fact is many reject the overwhelming scientific evidence and study that proves the Universe is approx 13.7 billion years old,

And against this, we have the following statements:

"Scientific results are inherently provisional. Scientists can never prove conclusively that they have described some aspect of the natural or physical world with complete accuracy. In that sense all scientific results must be treated as susceptible to error."

--from "http://darwin.nap.edu/books/0309051967/html/15.html" (National Acadmies of Science related webpage)

Try not to overstate your case.

Cheers!

990 posted on 09/30/2006 11:46:10 PM PDT by grey_whiskers
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 527 | View Replies]

To: stultorum

Fill me in, don't know what are you talking about?


991 posted on 09/30/2006 11:48:05 PM PDT by presently no screen name
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 986 | View Replies]

To: presently no screen name

Eight more to go...


992 posted on 09/30/2006 11:49:02 PM PDT by Al Simmons
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 991 | View Replies]

To: Virginia-American
We never see, for example, fossilized pegasi or centaurs.

"Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence placemarker".

Virginia, that look perilously close to becoming a "Darwin of the Gaps" ;-)

Please don't commit logical errors in your haste.

Cheers!

993 posted on 09/30/2006 11:49:36 PM PDT by grey_whiskers
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 580 | View Replies]

To: Al Simmons

'18 more to go' - I was wrong anyway - at the time it was only 17.


994 posted on 09/30/2006 11:49:44 PM PDT by presently no screen name
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 987 | View Replies]

To: Al Simmons

Eight what?


995 posted on 09/30/2006 11:50:12 PM PDT by stultorum (dont hire illegal aliens)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 992 | View Replies]

To: Al Simmons

5!!


996 posted on 09/30/2006 11:50:31 PM PDT by presently no screen name
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 992 | View Replies]

To: Virginia-American
No, demonstrably bad design shows that the hypothetical designer is not a good engineer.

You are jumping to a lot of conclusions!

The details are left as a proof to the interested lurkers on the thread.

Cheers!

997 posted on 09/30/2006 11:50:47 PM PDT by grey_whiskers
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 582 | View Replies]

To: stultorum

Four!


998 posted on 09/30/2006 11:50:48 PM PDT by Al Simmons
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 995 | View Replies]

To: grey_whiskers

TWO!!!!!!!!!!


999 posted on 09/30/2006 11:51:10 PM PDT by Al Simmons
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 997 | View Replies]

To: Al Simmons

"Its getting REAL late because I actually spent 5 minutes trying to figure out what you meant by '18 more to go'!!!"

What are you talking about? Eighteen (18) what?


1,000 posted on 09/30/2006 11:51:26 PM PDT by stultorum (dont hire illegal aliens)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 987 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 961-980981-1,0001,001-1,020 ... 1,181-1,195 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.

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