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

Skip to comments.

The Dini-gration of Darwinism
AgapePress ^ | April 29, 2003 | Mike S. Adams

Posted on 04/29/2003 10:43:39 AM PDT by Remedy

Texas Tech University biology professor Michael Dini recently came under fire for refusing to write letters of recommendation for students unable to "truthfully and forthrightly affirm a scientific answer" to the following question: "How do you think the human species originated?"

For asking this question, Professor Dini was accused of engaging in overt religious discrimination. As a result, a legal complaint was filed against Dini by the Liberty Legal Institute. Supporters of the complaint feared that consequences of the widespread adoption of Dini’s requirement would include a virtual ban of Christians from the practice of medicine and other related fields.

In an effort to defend his criteria for recommendation, Dini claimed that medicine was first rooted in the practice of magic. Dini said that religion then became the basis of medicine until it was replaced by science. After positing biology as the science most important to the study of medicine, he also posited evolution as the "central, unifying principle of biology" which includes both micro- and macro-evolution, which applies to all species.

In addition to claiming that someone who rejects the most important theory in biology cannot properly practice medicine, Dini suggested that physicians who ignore or neglect Darwinism are prone to making bad clinical decisions. He cautioned that a physician who ignores data concerning the scientific origins of the species cannot expect to remain a physician for long. He then rhetorically asked the following question: "If modern medicine is based on the method of science, then how can someone who denies the theory of evolution -- the very pinnacle of modern biological science -- ask to be recommended into a scientific profession by a professional scientist?"

In an apparent preemptive strike against those who would expose the weaknesses of macro-evolution, Dini claimed that "one can validly refer to the ‘fact’ of human evolution, even if all of the details are not yet known." Finally, he cautioned that a good scientist "would never throw out data that do not conform to their expectations or beliefs."

The legal aspect of this controversy ended this week with Dini finally deciding to change his recommendation requirements. But that does not mean it is time for Christians to declare victory and move on. In fact, Christians should be demanding that Dini’s question be asked more often in the court of public opinion. If it is, the scientific community will eventually be indicted for its persistent failure to address this very question in scientific terms.

Christians reading this article are already familiar with the creation stories found in the initial chapters of Genesis and the Gospel of John. But the story proffered by evolutionists to explain the origin of the species receives too little attention and scrutiny. In his two most recent books on evolution, Phillip Johnson gives an account of evolutionists’ story of the origin of the human species which is similar to the one below:

In the beginning there was the unholy trinity of the particles, the unthinking and unfeeling laws of physics, and chance. Together they accidentally made the amino acids which later began to live and to breathe. Then the living, breathing entities began to imagine. And they imagined God. But then they discovered science and then science produced Darwin. Later Darwin discovered evolution and the scientists discarded God.

Darwinists, who proclaim themselves to be scientists, are certainly entitled to hold this view of the origin of the species. But that doesn’t mean that their view is, therefore, scientific. They must be held to scientific standards requiring proof as long as they insist on asking students to recite these verses as a rite of passage into their "scientific" discipline.

It, therefore, follows that the appropriate way to handle professors like Michael Dini is not to sue them but, instead, to demand that they provide specific proof of their assertion that the origin of all species can be traced to primordial soup. In other words, we should pose Dr. Dini’s question to all evolutionists. And we should do so in an open public forum whenever the opportunity presents itself.

Recently, I asked Dr. Dini for that proof. He didn’t respond.

Dini’s silence as well as the silence of other evolutionists speaks volumes about the current status of the discipline of biology. It is worth asking ourselves whether the study of biology has been hampered by the widespread and uncritical acceptance of Darwinian principles. To some observers, its study has largely become a hollow exercise whereby atheists teach other atheists to blindly follow Darwin without asking any difficult questions.

At least that seems to be the way things have evolved.


TOPICS: Culture/Society; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: creatins; creation; crevo; crevolist; darwin; evoloonists; evolunacy; evolution
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 621-640641-660661-680 ... 1,961-1,975 next last
To: Not Insane
Anyone who doubts (but understands) the ‘theory of common descent’ is not competent for a job as a physician.
Is this statement true?

I would say it is if only because any doctor that didn't at least understand it slept through school.

641 posted on 05/15/2003 5:54:36 PM PDT by Heartlander
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 636 | View Replies]

To: whattajoke
Nope, he's not going to, he is just gonna tell us that we are wrong and must PROVE to him that we are right.

Then he'll hit us with some other inane and dishonest post.

Then when we explain it to him and blast his argument, he will go back to we need to prove that we are right.

The TRUE definition of a TROLL, no doubt in my mind, fits the definition to a tee, or at least my definition.
642 posted on 05/15/2003 5:55:23 PM PDT by Aric2000 (Are you on Grampa Dave's team? I am!! $5 a month is all it takes, come join!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 639 | View Replies]

To: ALS
All those amino acids have been found in interstellar dust clouds.
643 posted on 05/15/2003 5:56:48 PM PDT by Junior (Computers make very fast, very accurate mistakes.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 620 | View Replies]

To: ALS
Darwin didn't cover the origin of life (he thought God might have done it). On the Origin of Species deals specifically with natural selection.
644 posted on 05/15/2003 5:59:38 PM PDT by Junior (Computers make very fast, very accurate mistakes.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 623 | View Replies]

To: Junior
All those amino acids have been found in interstellar dust clouds.

Evolution as Cosmology of course. Everyone knows that!
645 posted on 05/15/2003 5:59:46 PM PDT by whattajoke
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 643 | View Replies]

To: ALS
telling me that something is "offered" as an explanation, is not very impressive as to its validity.

Agreed. The vast majority of explantions (hypotheses or theories) "offered" in science are immediately or eventually rejected. There is only one genuinely "impressive" indication of the scientific status of a theory: that it is actually used or implicated in the ongoing research of working scientists.

By this objective criteria, evolution is part of science and creationism isn't.

646 posted on 05/15/2003 6:01:32 PM PDT by Stultis
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 630 | View Replies]

To: ALS
Since we were talking about the Theory of Evolution )a scientific theory), one would need to accept the definition dealing with scientific theories.
647 posted on 05/15/2003 6:02:02 PM PDT by Junior (Computers make very fast, very accurate mistakes.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 625 | View Replies]

To: Junior
Darwin didn't cover the origin of life (he thought God might have done it). On the Origin of Species deals specifically with natural selection.

Darwin purposed that RM&NS is all that is required for the diversity of life we now see and logically comprehend - i.e. (now with neo-darwinism) there is no target for evolution and we are just lucky to realize our own luck.

648 posted on 05/15/2003 6:04:48 PM PDT by Heartlander
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 644 | View Replies]

To: whattajoke
Evolution as Cosmology of course. Everyone knows that!

Careful, my friend - that's pretty potent stuff you're messing with ;)


649 posted on 05/15/2003 6:06:40 PM PDT by general_re (No problem is so big that you can't run away from it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 645 | View Replies]

To: general_re
LOL, GOOD ONE General!!
650 posted on 05/15/2003 6:13:55 PM PDT by Aric2000 (Are you on Grampa Dave's team? I am!! $5 a month is all it takes, come join!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 649 | View Replies]

To: Junior
why would I be required to accept anything?
651 posted on 05/15/2003 6:14:45 PM PDT by ALS
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 647 | View Replies]

To: whattajoke
I think that he left, damn, and I was having fun playing whack-A-troll.
652 posted on 05/15/2003 6:15:30 PM PDT by Aric2000 (Are you on Grampa Dave's team? I am!! $5 a month is all it takes, come join!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 639 | View Replies]

To: Junior
"All those amino acids have been found in interstellar dust clouds."

and?
653 posted on 05/15/2003 6:15:40 PM PDT by ALS
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 643 | View Replies]

To: Aric2000
Oh, good, HE'S BACK!!!
654 posted on 05/15/2003 6:16:02 PM PDT by Aric2000 (Are you on Grampa Dave's team? I am!! $5 a month is all it takes, come join!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 652 | View Replies]

To: ALS
Because we require a common framework for discussions.
655 posted on 05/15/2003 6:16:49 PM PDT by Junior (Computers make very fast, very accurate mistakes.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 651 | View Replies]

To: ALS
And what?

Figure it out Genius.....

It is about as obvious as your "I'm a troll, HIT ME", attitude.
656 posted on 05/15/2003 6:17:11 PM PDT by Aric2000 (Are you on Grampa Dave's team? I am!! $5 a month is all it takes, come join!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 653 | View Replies]

To: Stultis
"By this objective criteria, evolution is part of science and creationism isn't."

objective?
Your science, maybe.

tellya what son, go back through all and any of my posts ever on FR and show me where I said I support "creationism".


good luck
657 posted on 05/15/2003 6:17:54 PM PDT by ALS
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 646 | View Replies]

To: ALS
You pointed out that all those amino acids would have to be conveniently in one place. I pointed out that they are.
658 posted on 05/15/2003 6:18:31 PM PDT by Junior (Computers make very fast, very accurate mistakes.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 653 | View Replies]

To: Aric2000
You seem to not only be devoid of brain matter, but have an odd fixation on trolls.

Do you have a collection?
659 posted on 05/15/2003 6:18:54 PM PDT by ALS
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 656 | View Replies]

To: Junior
"You pointed out that all those amino acids would have to be conveniently in one place. I pointed out that they are."

So you believe life came from outer space?
660 posted on 05/15/2003 6:19:57 PM PDT by ALS
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 658 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 621-640641-660661-680 ... 1,961-1,975 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