Posted on 08/05/2019 5:16:09 AM PDT by Kaslin
Gallup recently announced that forty percent of all Americans believe in creationism. A better storyline to its recent polling data might be that only one in five Americans believes in Darwinism, which was a wobbly theory when first proposed almost two centuries ago and which has become an increasingly improbable explanation for the origin of life and species during the last two hundred years. That would be a better storyline, but it is not the storyline presented by Gallup.
Darwinists are invariably the product of an educational system that has as little to do with free thought as the educational systems of Nazi Germany or the Soviet Union. Groupthink, instead, is what these institutions create and nurture. There are no longer "schools of thought," but simply "settled science" and its detractors (those with free and thinking minds).
It is Darwinism, not its alternative theories, that is an intolerant system of blind faith that brooks no reconsideration, no conflicting scientific opinion, and no independent thought. This shows up not only in the purging of academicians who hold politically incorrect views in life sciences, which Ben Stein exposed in his 2008 documentary Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed, but in deliberate mischaracterization of the debates about the origin of life.
Consider creationism, one strain which comprises the theory that life developed literally according to the Bible. Darwinists dishonestly pretend creationism is presented as the only non-Darwinian explanation for the beginning and development of life and any theory that conflicts with Darwinism is in fact creationism.
(Excerpt) Read more at americanthinker.com ...
Darwin’s hypothesis being called theory is manipulation by political entities. That justifies them making decisions that an educated monkey would reject.
meanwhile, Creos have faith in the faith that created myth
Creos? Is that slang for people who believe God created everything?
We’ve learned a heck of a lot about biology in the past 150 years. And the more we learn, the less likely it seems that unguided natural selection could be responsible for the life we see around us.
Have never read Origin of the Species. I’ve heard that Darwin places black Africans as being somewhat higher than apes but lower than whites. That this book is where the idea of “race” came into being. Before Origin of the Species there was only one race, the human race. Can anybody who has actually read the book confirm or refute? Or am I going to have to read it for myself?
All you need to do is listen to or read Stephen C. Meyers books Signature in the Cell & Darwin’s Doubt and you will know that Darwin’s book can be put away forever.
No, Creo is a person who expends their life force creating all sorts of ignorant and false claims about the science initially espoused by Charles Darwin.
He goes into it more in a later book “The Descent of Man”.
In chapter XX he talks about an African tribe, the Jollofs, who are renowned for their physical attractiveness. When tribesmen were asked why they came to be that way, they replied that for generations they sold the ugly women to slavers.
Oh. Okay. Thanks for clearing that up. What science did Darwin initially espouse when it came to how everything came into being?
Life on the earth has all the hallmarks of a top down intelligently directed design. Darwin’s theory, which makes sense for some small adaptations, posits a bottom up design. The issue is it is mathematically impossible for reasons I haven’t the time to get into here but involve what is required to construct a functional protein and cell.
“Darwinism, which was a wobbly theory when first proposed almost two centuries ago and which has become an increasingly improbable explanation for the origin of life”
His proposition is that all species of life have descended over time from common ancestors which we call evolution. He doesn’t speculate how life began.
His speculation about apes —> blacks —> whites is, in my opinion, just speculation
Blacks or whites can’t breed with apes but can breed with each other so what does that tell us?
I think the black-white distinction is an environmental and cultural thing.
Exactly 100% correct. Darwin Can maybe explain small adaptations but his theory as it applies to ‘origins of species’ is simply mathematically impossible. Life on earth appears to have been top down and directed in its design.
Whether it has the hallmarks of a top down or bottom up design, it still has the hallmarks of design which, by definition, suggests a designer.
Oh. Okay. Getting back to Darwin, xoes he offer it as speculation or science?
Haven’t read Descent of Man, either. Is that a joke?
You can freely download scans of Charlie’s original books at Archive.org::
Title: “On the Origin of Species By Means of Natural Selection or the Preservation of Favored Races in the Struggle for Life”
1st Edition, 1859:
https://archive.org/details/onoriginofspecie1859darw/page/n10
6th Edition, 1901 (last edition with corrections):
https://archive.org/details/originofspeciesb00darw_0/page/n9
Charlie’s other books, including the Descent of Man, are also available for free download.
No, Creo is a person who expends their life force creating all sorts of ignorant and false claims about the science initially espoused by Charles Darwin.
*******************************************************
Charlie was not a scientist, and there is no science to be found in his books. There is a lot of extrapolation, but extrapolation is not science, nor is consensus.
To date, no scientific evidence for the foundation of Charlie’s theory — common descent — has been discovered.
Mr. Kalamata
Ultimately, the theory of evolution doesn’t give us rats to cats, or rats to dogs or even rats to rabbits.
It gives us rabbits from a hat.
Evolution is the quintessential sleight of hand trick.
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.