The Dini-gration of Darwinism

AgapePress ^ | April 29, 2003 | Mike S. Adams

[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.

[ALS]

Thank you for beautifully illustrating the entire problem with evoloonists in general.

They ASSume everything they are told.

I'm a man, you moron.

And while we are at it...
Not once did I state in this thread I was christian, believed in creationism, was a creationist or even believed in God.
But every one of you loons attacked me on the basis you automatically believed it.

ALL I did say was that I think evolution is a crap theory.

All this goes to show that none of you are here to prove your failed theory, but here to just attack anyone that doesn't drink from your empty bottle of Thunderbird.

sleep tite sailorboy

[Aric2000]

I apologize for taking so long to get back to this, but took the kids and the wife out to watch the Lunar Eclipse.

Didn't get to see it because of the clouds, so finally gave up and came home.

Since you asked so nicely, and I am not a coward, like some on this board. I will tell you.

The creator, god, hula, or whatever you want to call it.

Set the universe in motion, took something, not sure what, don't know physics all that well, made the big bang, around 15 billion of our years ago. Put all the rules in place, and then sat back and let it happen.

We, during our lifetimes, have a challenge, to figure out what the rules are, and then how all this life came about.

The more we learn, the more we appreciate what the creator did.

Who or what is the creator?

I have no idea, but I sure do appreciate the fact that I'm here.

THat is a pretty general idea of what I believe, I could spend all year on specifics, but I think that you get the idea.

THe more science learns, the closer I am to appreciating what the creator actually did, and how powerful that creator is.

[Heartlander]

Thank you for your honesty!

BTW: It is cloudy here as well…

[general_re]

I'm a man, you moron

Is that why you're so interested in knowing if I'm gay? Are we looking for common elements here? Is that cyberbabes website someplace where you can go to relax and "just be yourself"?

Not once did I state in this thread I was christian, believed in creationism, was a creationist or even believed in God.
But every one of you loons attacked me on the basis you automatically believed it.

Wow. I mean, wow. 'Cuz, see, I'm reading the actual thread, not the one you've invented in your mind, and I just can't see where I brought up you being a creationist. Or where I brought up you being a Christian - in fact, you brought Christianity into this, not me.

BTW, how do you drink from an empty bottle? I really must know, and you sound awfully authoritative on the subject of screw-top wine labels. But you don't strike me as a Thunderbird kind of person - I'm thinking Night Train is more your speed...

[ALS]

lousy save sailerboy

just admit your loose in the shorts, a hall monitor, can't read, believe in plan 9 from outer space and you have lousy taste in vintage swill

[general_re]

just admit your loose in the shorts, a hall monitor, can't read, believe in plan 9 from outer space and you have lousy taste in vintage swill

"And if that don't refute evilushun, Elmer, then ah cain't think whut will!"

[ALS]

toss in toothless hick

[Aric2000]

We obviously misunderstand each other for some reason.

Let me restate for you.

A doctor that tells me that evolution as a scientific theory is ridiculous is not a doctor that I will go to.

Why? Because then he believes that germs don't change, can't become immune to drugs, can't become some nastier bug, etc etc.

A doctor who understands the principle of evolution, and admits that it is indeed a valid scientific theory, and yet believes in creationism. GREAT, I'll see him whenever I am sick.

A doctor that is a christian, but does not take creationism literally, and believes in not only the validity of evolution, but uses it in his practice, I will absolutely go and see him.

Now, I will also address another point that the rest of you seemed to be clueless about, those that were not, I don't believe I have to point you out by name, you know who you are.

Now, let's start again.

You are having a debate, you are debating the flood with another poster.

Then I come in and let you have it with both barrels.

I think your flood is crap.

You: why do you think the flood is crap?

me: I just do, so you prove to me that the flood happened.

You: no, tell me what makes you think that the flood is crap?

me: Because creationism is a crock, it's impossible.

you: but we were talking about the flood?

me: So am I, but without creationism, the flood could not have occurred.

you: excuse me, but we were discussing the flood, you wanna talk about creationism.

me: no, I am talking about the flood.

you: no your not, your talking about creation, they are 2 different things.

me: The flood is crap, now prove to me that the flood happened.

you: but we were discussing the flood, and you are talking about creationism.

me: what are you talking about, can;t you answer the question, you don't know anything about the flood do you?

and of course it goes on and on and on.....

Of course by now you would not only be confused, but probably a bit frustrated and pissed off.

Then this detractor troll, will begin to call you names as well, accuse you of all sorts of interesting things.

Then, when you finally blow me off, I will write you nasty e-mails, then after you left, anyone that disagreed with me, I would say that they are you under another nick.

Now, shall we go into the real world now and go over what actually happened?

I and others were discussing BIOLOGICAL evolution, these 2 disruptor/Trolls came in discussing COSMOLOGICAL evolution, 2 different things.

But, like the flood and creationism, they are part of a whole, but are really separate chapters, because if someone is talking one thing, and they come in discussing another, claiming that they are actually discussing the same thing, when they KNOW for a fact that they are not.

Then what are these 2 people discussing creation, when you are discussing the flood?

TROLLS and DETRACTORS.

Do you follow our chain of thought now?

Have I put it in a way that everyone can understand?

I hope so, because I am not going to go over it again.

[general_re]

Hey, all I gotta do is keep feeding you rope here - whatever you do, don't stop now. Let the whole world see just how deep and thoughful the typical anti-evolutionist is. Maybe you can call me a pedophile or a communist or an atheist or something while you're at it. Just keep searching - someday you'll find the magic combination of abuse and insults that really refutes evolution. I promise. Really. Go ahead and lay it on really thick...

[ALS]

"Maybe you can call me a pedophile or a communist or an atheist or something while you're at it."

Freudian slip?

[general_re]

Just making sure you don't leave anything out that you have in your little mental rolodex, Susie. I want you to be the very best evolution refuter you can be, and everyone knows that the way to disprove a scientific theory is to insult and abuse the people who disagree with you. Isn't that right?

[Aric2000]

Hey, if the Troll name fits, why shouldn't he wear it?

Right?

[Aric2000]

Tell me what you think of 788, the metaphors were all I could think of, but I think they fit the situation OK.

What do you think?

[ALS]

you're projecting again, and you can't seem to pry your eyes off my crotch

yes, you do your ilk proud, without even a single post supporting your crap theory.

they'll probably make you club president

[general_re]

I think it must be a full moon or something. Whatever. I think I've proven my point quite well enough - these folks haven't got an argument, and it's an open question as to whether they have two fully-firing neurons to rub together, but there you go. If you want to play with old Cyberbabes there, be my guest, but keep an eye on her - she poops on the rug if you question her particular worldview...

[Aric2000]

Nah, I am tired of the troll, he claims to have the answer, but won't share it, then he expects me to prove to him the theory of evolution, when I have no idea what his problem with evolution is.

I am not going to explain the entire theory to him, but if he had at least given me a clue where he had a problem with it, I could have taken a shot.

It is obvious to me that he in fact does not want an answer, he just wants to call names.

So, no, I'll pass, but thanks anyway.

There are actually adults on this board who will actually.... debate. So I think that I will go and find them.

[ALS]

the other space cadets won't help ya

you really need to see a doc about that orientation problem

all you've done is accuse me of the only thing you've done since you entered this thread.

but then again, which of your ilk hasn't?

all hail Zork!

[Aric2000]

Sorry heartlander, did not mean to ignore you.

You are very welcome.

[general_re]

Just keep saying that to yourself, and eventually it'll all be okay. You held the line against those materialist evolutionists tonight, and you did a damn fine job, Susie - nobody slings the abuse like you do. Run along now - the adults want to talk about science and evidence and theories and facts, and you don't want to hang around while they use their big, boring old grown-up words do you?

Take the last word, Susie - I'm outta here...

[Aric2000]

800 yes!!!