New Book Uncovers “the Life and Lies of Charles Darwin”

Discovery Institute ^ | June 10, 2009 | Sonja West

[GodGunsGuts]

According to Benjamin Wiker’s provocative new biography, The Darwin Myth: the Life and Lies of Charles Darwin, Charles Darwin was an honorable and likable man, a family man. He loved his siblings; he was devoted to his wife; he loved his children and grieved deeply over his daughter’s death.

But Darwin was also someone who presented to the public an elaborate and even deceptive story about himself and his work to advance a philosophical agenda.

While there are many biographies of Charles Darwin, Wiker’s deserves attention because...

[Getready]

One of the problems of your statement, is that when credentialed
people question the implications of Darwins theory on
biological systems(as they are currently understood), if
they happen to be non-atheists they are attacked for their
belief in a God. So why shouldn’t an analysis of Darwin and
his (not really, his) theories include his atheism?

Is it because non-believers in evolution are wrong from the
outset?

What is it, in the life of the mind, that must exclude a God
who can interfere or direct physical processes? (p.s. don’t
do that with SETI researchers)

Quite the opposite case exists when Haeckels “ontogeny recapitulates
phylogeny” is finally accepted as a fraud (See late S.J. Goulds
writings). The facts are that it was accepted and even presented
in textbooks(it was in mine when I took embryology) as
“true”, cause it was just illustrative of how evolutionary
processes are everywhere, whether the facts backed it up or not.

It was allowed cuz he trumpeted the truth of evolution, even
though his evidence was faulty.

So give the God believers a break, OK?

[Moonman62]

Again, they were not asking to teach creation by anyone’s point of view but only the FACTS pro and con of evolution, which is what we should all pursue be it whatever the issue.

Are they also going to teach geology and astronomy that point to an Earth and Universe that are billions of years old? Evolution and and science as a whole are incomplete. That's why scientists still do science, and that's why some old theories get tossed out in light of new observations.

That doesn't justify the daily spam-like promotions of ignorance from GGG that reflect poorly on conservatives.

[steve-b]

I think all this creationism daily thread stuff is just some sort of trolls to discredit FR.

[Moonman62]

One day, when they finally haul you off to the Funny Farm, you're going to be shaking your fists in the air yelling out Darwin! Darwin!

You probably already mumble out his name in your sleep while you're grinding your teeth.

[Moonman62]

One of the problems of your statement, is that when credentialed people question the implications of Darwins theory on biological systems

Specifically, what theory is that?

[longtermmemmory]

so then why is it not just quarenteened in a special creationism sandbox that does not clutter our real news?

we also now have a flurry of bloggers who “jam” FR whenever there is a buckhead, santeli, or any other good story with duplicate but not duplicate links to blogs of links to the original story. This jamming dilutes the stories. (ala today’s very public barney frank on air hissy fit on cnbc)

[freespirited]

One of the problems of your statement, is that when credentialed people question the implications of Darwins theory on biological systems(as they are currently understood), if they happen to be non-atheists they are attacked for their belief in a God.

I dont know what I said that gave you that impression. But let me assure you I certainly didn't intend to do so.

I have never, in a long career, seen any credentialed person who accepts evolutionary theory attacked for being a believer. On a personal level, I would say my acquaintances/colleagues are probably evenly divided between believers and non-believers.

I guess from your comment that you have had this experience. I am sorry if this is the case. Religious beliefs IMO are a personal matter, independent of science and I see no reason why anyone should be criticizing another for his spiritual life.

[itsahoot]

Please do look at the science of evolution, pros and cons. It has many problems.

It seems strange to me, that under the law, if you only look at one suspect in a crime, your case may be thrown out of court. Of course if you only look for information that supports your assumptions, about evolution, that is known as rigorous scientific investigation.

[Jeff Gordon]

Another stupid ad hominem article.

Ad hominem attacks seem to be the bread and butter of Creationists' debate tactics.

[Jeff Gordon]

they were not asking to teach creation by anyone’s point of view but only the FACTS pro and con of evolution, which is what we should all pursue be it whatever the issue.

You know and I know that you know this argument totally disingenuous. This "teach the pro and con" meme is used by Creationists and only by Creationist to try to slip their nonsense in under the door. Do you think that the rest of the world is so stuck on stupid that we can't see right through you?

[Fichori]

“I think all this creationism daily thread stuff is just some sort of trolls to discredit FR.”

No.