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 ... 661-680681-700701-720 ... 1,961-1,975 next last
To: Dark Knight
You sound like FC, what the hell are you talking about?

Again, time for dinner, be back later, for those of you who do not know what BBL means.
681 posted on 05/15/2003 6:48:34 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 679 | View Replies]

To: ALS
I like you a lot !
682 posted on 05/15/2003 7:06:49 PM PDT by f.Christian (( the VERY sick mind - won't recognize facts -- REALITY -- probability anymore ! ))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 680 | View Replies]

To: Aric2000
I suppose it was a tough proposition. If a scientist can't deal with the question of who would be a better physician in a better way than a personnel director could, is he really a scientist?

Could evolution break the top five questions a competent personnel director would ask a prospective physician? Probably not.

Would die hard evolutionists continue to ask those questions? Until they die (LOL by definition).

It is not a question of science. It is a question of faith. Evolutionists and creationists are arguing faith and trying to use logic and science.

Inappropriate tools.

Duh.

Gee, I believe my posts have been clearly not in the style of anyone else, and the arguments the same. Do you have a creationist or evolutionist person in mind that you want to use as an ad hominen attack, or do you really believe in debate?

DK

Have fun with dinner, there have beem more than a few tasty debates on FR on that subject!!!
683 posted on 05/15/2003 7:13:07 PM PDT by Dark Knight
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 681 | View Replies]

To: Dark Knight
You choose to have "criteria" you never use. You want to prove a theory...(first clue, it is a theory). You chose to ignore better and easier criteria.

Please refer to my post 634 before using the "it's only a theory drivel."

"Easier," I'll buy. "Better?" Not for a millisecond. "Goddidit" is admittedly far easier than 140 years of legit scientific research, backed up by voluminous studies, peer reviewed journals, and countless documentation. Why bother learning anything? "Goddidit!" (Except in the case of those damned fossils... "Satandidat!") So we agree... your childish fantasy world of "Zap, Goddidit" is indeed far easier than reality. Ahem.

And when confronted with the ideas, you stick your head in the sand.

Maybe I missed that part. I have yet to actually see a creationist (aka ID proponent) put forth a single new idea. Please do so and I'll wipe the sand from my hair and review what you've got.

In the meantime, I'll be preparing for Halley's Comet.
684 posted on 05/15/2003 7:19:15 PM PDT by whattajoke
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 679 | View Replies]

To: All
Well, while we are waiting…
Warning: This ‘theory of evolution’ is not for children. (IMHO - it should not be for anyone)
A Natural History of Rape: Biological Bases of Sexual Coercion
685 posted on 05/15/2003 7:19:45 PM PDT by Heartlander
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 683 | View Replies]

To: Dark Knight
OK Dark night.

Because I feel like being nice to you tonight, I will try and explain to you what happened.

OK, let's say that we are in a creationism debate, OK?

Now, you start off telling someone why you believe in creationism, OK?

Then I come in with this.

me: creationism is crap

Then you respond: why do you think creationism is crap? give me a reason.

Me: Because I do, PROVE to me that creationism is true.

You: I believe in creationism, why do you NOT believe in creationism, what about creationism makes it crap for you?

me: None of your business, I asked you a question? Prove to me creationism is true.

You: Why should I prove to you, when you have not answered my question about why creationism is crap?

me: Now your evading, you don't know ANYTHING about creationsim, your just afraid to look like a fool in front of your creationist buddies, now answer my question, prove to me that creationsim is true.

you: What the ehll are you talking about, I asked you why you did not believe in creationism, now answer my first question and we will talk.

me: See you're afraid to answer the question, now prove that creationism is true.

You: What do you believe that seems so much better then creationism.

me: My beliefs are NONE of your business, now come on coward, prove to me creationism is true.

Of course in there I will toss some out of context quote, and call you names, and be an all around pain in the ass, BUT, A: I will NEVER answer your original question of why, B: I will continue to demand that YOU prove your viewpoint without telling you mine, and C: I will continue to tell you that your theory is crap, and not give you a clue of why I think that.

Now, is that debate?

Or is that the sign of troll?

Come on and be honest here.

Oh, and when you finally tell me to shove off, because you realize that I am indeed a troll, I will harass you with nasty personal messages over the private mail system.

686 posted on 05/15/2003 7:20:08 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 679 | View Replies]

To: Aric2000
PROVE to me that creationism is true.

Asking someone to prove a theory. Aric2000 just does not get it.

687 posted on 05/15/2003 7:24:07 PM PDT by Last Visible Dog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 686 | View Replies]

To: Last Visible Dog
Excuse me, are you really this stupid?

What part of, I asked the first question, do you not understand?

Him: Evolution is crap....

Me:OK, why do you believe that evolution is crap.

Him: prove to me that evolution is true...


Now LVD, who asked the first question, who made the FIRST statement?

I asked for an explanation, he never gave me one, but expected me to answer his question.


It's called debate, but you really wouldn't know what that is, would you.

That is my last post to you LVD, Have no idea why I answered you in the first place.
688 posted on 05/15/2003 7:29:49 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 687 | View Replies]

To: Dark Knight
And when confronted with the ideas, you stick your head in the sand.

You have done a very good job of summing up Aric2000's MO.

He is an intellectually dishonest disrupter.

689 posted on 05/15/2003 7:29:53 PM PDT by Last Visible Dog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 679 | View Replies]

To: Last Visible Dog
This has been the poor deluded kid's problem all along.

He can't prove his own crap belief, but demands everyone else prove their own.

That, and he has a troll doll collection.


690 posted on 05/15/2003 7:31:33 PM PDT by ALS
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 687 | View Replies]

To: ALS; Last Visible Dog
OHHHH, two disruptor, trolls in a row, skipping placemarker.
691 posted on 05/15/2003 7:33:18 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 690 | View Replies]

To: Aric2000; general_re
WTF? I posted that "Evo as Cosmo" nonsense and LVD magically appears.

And so ends my fun for the night.
692 posted on 05/15/2003 7:35:38 PM PDT by whattajoke (LVD = Thread killer)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 691 | View Replies]

To: Aric2000
Excuse me, are you really this stupid?

I think people are getting tired of you disrupting these debates with your insults, intellectual dishonesty, and childish games.

You asked somebody to PROVE a theory - and you have the nerve to call me stupid. You just don't get it. Why should you - you are here to disrupt, not debate or exchange ideas.

693 posted on 05/15/2003 7:35:48 PM PDT by Last Visible Dog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 688 | View Replies]

To: whattajoke
WTF? I posted that "Evo as Cosmo" nonsense and LVD magically appears.

Ignore whatajoke - he actually thinks evolution has nothing to do with cosmology. He is a disrupter - balrog666, Junior,whattajoke,general_re and Aric200 hang around evolution-related debates sniping from the sidelines and spewing insults. Ignore them - they are not here to debate or exchange ideas - they have closed minds and are here to snipe from the sidelines and insult people.

694 posted on 05/15/2003 7:40:25 PM PDT by Last Visible Dog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 692 | View Replies]

To: whattajoke
"Goddidit"

(or mother nature got it on with father time in the back of a 15 billion year old Buick from out of nowhere)

…or

bioGenesis 1:1 …and on the 2 billionth day, nature accidentally puked forth chemicals and looked upon it and said, "this is neither good or bad, it's just chemicals, and I shall form these chemicals in no specific image and without intelligence". Then plants, insects, fish, and man evolved from this puke without intelligence, each according to its inane kind.

695 posted on 05/15/2003 7:41:29 PM PDT by Heartlander
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 684 | View Replies]

To: Last Visible Dog
good call

now if we could only get his parents to pull the plug on his internet enabled Gameboy.......
696 posted on 05/15/2003 7:41:40 PM PDT by ALS
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 693 | View Replies]

To: Aric2000
OHHHH, two disruptor, trolls in a row, skipping placemarker.

Ah yes. Aric2000 thinks it is witty to fill the forums up with this crap.

697 posted on 05/15/2003 7:41:56 PM PDT by Last Visible Dog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 691 | View Replies]

To: HalfFull
btt
698 posted on 05/15/2003 7:42:47 PM PDT by HalfFull
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 601 | View Replies]

To: ALS
good call

I have watched those disrupters turn good debates and exchanges into childish food fights. It is pointless to interact with them because they are intellectually dishonest. The only thing we can do is ignore them until they are able and willing to be intellectually honest participants.

699 posted on 05/15/2003 7:45:47 PM PDT by Last Visible Dog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 696 | View Replies]

To: Last Visible Dog
I like to fish. I find fishing to be relaxing. In fact, sometimes I like to go trolling.

LOL!

700 posted on 05/15/2003 7:46:39 PM PDT by Heartlander
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 697 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 661-680681-700701-720 ... 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