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

Skip to comments.

Why Darwinism Is Doomed
WorldNetDaily ^ | 09/27/2006 | Jonathan Wells

Posted on 09/27/2006 9:56:09 AM PDT by SirLinksalot

Why Darwinism is doomed

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Posted: September 27, 2006 1:00 a.m. Eastern

By Jonathan Wells, Ph.D.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

© 2006

Harvard evolutionary biologist Stephen Jay Gould wrote in 1977: "Biology took away our status as paragons created in the image of God." Darwinism teaches that we are accidental byproducts of purposeless natural processes that had no need for God, and this anti-religious dogma enjoys a taxpayer-funded monopoly in America's public schools and universities. Teachers who dare to question it openly have in many cases lost their jobs.

The issue here is not "evolution" – a broad term that can mean simply change within existing species (which no one doubts). The issue is Darwinism – which claims that all living things are descended from a common ancestor, modified by natural selection acting on random genetic mutations.

According to Darwinists, there is such overwhelming evidence for their view that it should be considered a fact. Yet to the Darwinists' dismay, at least three-quarters of the American people – citizens of the most scientifically advanced country in history – reject it.

A study published Aug. 11 in the pro-Darwin magazine Science attributes this primarily to biblical fundamentalism, even though polls have consistently shown that half of the Americans who reject Darwinism are not biblical fundamentalists. Could it be that the American people are skeptical of Darwinism because they're smarter than Darwinists think?

On Aug. 17, the pro-Darwin magazine Nature reported that scientists had just found the "brain evolution gene." There is circumstantial evidence that this gene may be involved in brain development in embryos, and it is surprisingly different in humans and chimpanzees. According to Nature, the gene may thus harbor "the secret of what makes humans different from our nearest primate relatives."

Three things are remarkable about this report. First, it implicitly acknowledges that the evidence for Darwinism was never as overwhelming as its defenders claim. It has been almost 30 years since Gould wrote that biology accounts for human nature, yet Darwinists are just now turning up a gene that may have been involved in brain evolution.

Second, embryologists know that a single gene cannot account for the origin of the human brain. Genes involved in embryo development typically have multiple effects, and complex organs such as the brain are influenced by many genes. The simple-mindedness of the "brain evolution gene" story is breathtaking.

Third, the only thing scientists demonstrated in this case was a correlation between a genetic difference and brain size. Every scientist knows, however, that correlation is not the same as causation. Among elementary school children, reading ability is correlated with shoe size, but this is because young schoolchildren with small feet have not yet learned to read – not because larger feet cause a student to read better or because reading makes the feet grow. Similarly, a genetic difference between humans and chimps cannot tell us anything about what caused differences in their brains unless we know what the gene actually does. In this case, as Nature reports, "what the gene does is a mystery."

So after 150 years, Darwinists are still looking for evidence – any evidence, no matter how skimpy – to justify their speculations. The latest hype over the "brain evolution gene" unwittingly reveals just how underwhelming the evidence for their view really is.

The truth is Darwinism is not a scientific theory, but a materialistic creation myth masquerading as science. It is first and foremost a weapon against religion – especially traditional Christianity. Evidence is brought in afterwards, as window dressing.

This is becoming increasingly obvious to the American people, who are not the ignorant backwoods religious dogmatists that Darwinists make them out to be. Darwinists insult the intelligence of American taxpayers and at the same time depend on them for support. This is an inherently unstable situation, and it cannot last.

If I were a Darwinist, I would be afraid. Very afraid.

Get Wells' widely popular "Politically Incorrect Guide to Darwinism and Intelligent Design"

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Jonathan Wells is the author of "The Politically Incorrect Guide™ to Darwinism and Intelligent Design" (Regnery, 2006) and Icons of Evolution (Regnery, 2000). He holds a Ph.D. in biology from the University of California at Berkeley and a Ph.D. in theology from Yale University. Wells is currently a senior fellow at the Discovery Institute in Seattle


TOPICS: Culture/Society; Editorial; Philosophy
KEYWORDS: backwardsthinking; crevolist; darwinism; darwinismhasfailed; doomed; evofury; fishwithfeet; headinsand; pepperedmoths; scaredevos; wearealldoomedputz; whyreligionisdoomed; wingnutdaily
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100101-150151-200 ... 1,151-1,195 next last

1 posted on 09/27/2006 9:56:10 AM PDT by SirLinksalot
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: SirLinksalot
Uh oh. An evolution thread. We know what this means.

Dun dun dun, dun dun-dun, dun dun dun, dun dun-dun, dun dun dun, dun dun-dun

MORTAL KOMBAT!

2 posted on 09/27/2006 9:59:09 AM PDT by Gordongekko909 (Mark 5:9)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Gordongekko909

Darwin wins!

Flawless Victory!


3 posted on 09/27/2006 10:01:22 AM PDT by TOWER
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: SirLinksalot

These creationist goons make thinking conservatives look bad.

If anyone does not believe in Darwinism, i'll take them on a tour in the Museum of Natural History and explain it.


4 posted on 09/27/2006 10:01:32 AM PDT by finnman69 (cum puella incedit minore medio corpore sub quo manifestu s globus, inflammare animos)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: PatrickHenry
Breathtaking simple-mindedness ping.
5 posted on 09/27/2006 10:02:23 AM PDT by Physicist
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: PatrickHenry

"Evolution is doomed" ping


6 posted on 09/27/2006 10:02:24 AM PDT by indcons
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Gordongekko909
Image Hosted by ImageShack.us
7 posted on 09/27/2006 10:02:28 AM PDT by cripplecreek (If stupidity got us into this mess, then why can't it get us out?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: SirLinksalot

Bump.


8 posted on 09/27/2006 10:03:28 AM PDT by balch3
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: finnman69

You'll find it's much busier and more crowded now that the Museum of American History is closed for two years ~ lunch will be real trouble.


9 posted on 09/27/2006 10:03:52 AM PDT by muawiyah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: SirLinksalot

"Darwinism teaches that we are accidental byproducts of purposeless natural processes that had no need for God,..."

"Darwinism" teaches nothing of the sort. Evolution is an explanation of, to be brief, how we got here. It describes a theorized mechanism, one which is perfectly compatible with Christianity.


10 posted on 09/27/2006 10:05:29 AM PDT by Buck W. (If you push something hard enough, it will fall over.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: editor-surveyor

Thread not starting out in Smoky Backroom placemarker : )


11 posted on 09/27/2006 10:05:54 AM PDT by FreedomProtector
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SirLinksalot

OHHH JESUSTH CHRISTH! JESUSTH CHRISTH!

12 posted on 09/27/2006 10:06:09 AM PDT by Al Simmons (I am sorely AFFECTED by the social EFFECT of people's confusion over these two simple words..)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Physicist; indcons

Thank you for the pings, gentlemen. In accordance with my long-standing policy, I won't disturb the evolution ping list for a nonsensical creationist article. This thread is an embarrassment to conservatism.


13 posted on 09/27/2006 10:06:11 AM PDT by PatrickHenry (When the Inquisition comes, you may be the rackee, not the rackor.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: SirLinksalot

Berkeley biology and Yale theology. God help us.

At least he's not an ethicist.


14 posted on 09/27/2006 10:06:38 AM PDT by NicknamedBob (If the "enemy of your enemy" is Ghengis Khan, Ghengis Khan is not your friend.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Buck W.

Did you read the article? Note this paragraph:

The issue here is not "evolution" – a broad term that can mean simply change within existing species (which no one doubts). The issue is Darwinism – which claims that all living things are descended from a common ancestor, modified by natural selection acting on random genetic mutations.

Darwinism is absolutely not compatible with Scriptural Christianity.

That said, you're free to believe what you want.


15 posted on 09/27/2006 10:07:16 AM PDT by Theo (Global warming "scientists." Pro-evolution "scientists." They're both wrong.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: finnman69
Some here at FR once chided me calling purveyors of ID and Creationism ignorant. I answered thus.

No, I consider ignorance throwing out the FACTS of science. One can believe in the creation of the universe by a creator..the same creator who made the 'soul' of man in his own image and likeness, without throwing out the science of the universe. You see by throwing out the science...your questioning Gods motives, techniques and you are not living up to his expectations of the inquisitive sentient being he breathed life into.

16 posted on 09/27/2006 10:07:24 AM PDT by Vaquero ("An armed society is a polite society" Robert A. Heinlein)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: SirLinksalot

Moonbats on both sides, I see. Oh well, I can live with ours.


17 posted on 09/27/2006 10:07:44 AM PDT by Paradox (American Conservatives: Keeping the world safe for Liberalism.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SirLinksalot
Evolution and Faith are neither enemies nor mutually exclusive - they are different discliplines addressing different aspects of human existence and thought.

'Flat-earth', er... 'Young-earth' Creationists are (in my opinion) fools who are either too daft to understand the principle of evidence gathering and logical analysis, or who have willfully chosen to ignore scientific evidence owing usually to acceptance at an early age of a clearly erroneous, rote religious dogma.

18 posted on 09/27/2006 10:07:59 AM PDT by Al Simmons (Holocaust deniers and other anti-semites are the lowest form of human scum.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SirLinksalot
The truth is Darwinism is not a scientific theory, but a materialistic creation myth masquerading as science. It is first and foremost a weapon against religion – especially traditional Christianity.

It's interesting to see someone with a PhD in Biology take this approach.

19 posted on 09/27/2006 10:09:06 AM PDT by ClearCase_guy (The broken wall, the burning roof and tower. And Agamemnon dead.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SirLinksalot
If I were a Darwinist, I would be afraid. Very afraid.

If I was silly enough to believe this article, I would be afraid, very afraid.

20 posted on 09/27/2006 10:09:25 AM PDT by Coyoteman (I love the sound of beta decay in the morning!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Vaquero

That was well put and I can agree with that. I'm not an atheist, but I am not religious. However, I have respect for religion, but not if it throws out the 'facts of science' as you eloquently stated your position.


21 posted on 09/27/2006 10:10:09 AM PDT by finnman69 (cum puella incedit minore medio corpore sub quo manifestu s globus, inflammare animos)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: finnman69

Ducking...

22 posted on 09/27/2006 10:11:06 AM PDT by oldleft
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Gordongekko909

Evolution happens...


23 posted on 09/27/2006 10:12:25 AM PDT by ExtremeUnction
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: finnman69

>>>If anyone does not believe in Darwinism, i'll take them on a tour in the Museum of Natural History and explain it.>>>

"According to Darwinists, there is such overwhelming evidence for their view that it should be considered a fact."

It's true cause I said so! Right?


24 posted on 09/27/2006 10:13:53 AM PDT by sandbar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Theo

Oh, puh-leeze. This is a bit of semantic obfuscation that would make Bill Clinton blush scarlet.


25 posted on 09/27/2006 10:15:02 AM PDT by steve-b (The urge to save humanity is almost always a false front for the urge to rule.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: oldleft

I don't think every creationist believes the earth is 10,000 years old.


26 posted on 09/27/2006 10:15:30 AM PDT by sandbar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: Buck W.

>>"Darwinism teaches that we are accidental byproducts of purposeless natural processes that had no need for God,..."

"Darwinism" teaches nothing of the sort. Evolution is an explanation of, to be brief, how we got here. It describes a theorized mechanism, one which is perfectly compatible with Christianity.<<

For crying out loud, quit mincing words, With the exception of your first sentence and your last "compatibility" remark, you are saying the same thing thw quotes says. Read the actual words in what you quoted.

And Darwinism is pretty much dead. Those that never believed it in school, yet were not religious, would be what we call "skeptics". Those who did believe it, hook, line and sinker are what we call "lemmings".

It is good to ask questions. Many of the "anti-evolution" books are written by men who never got straight answers from their biology professors regarding evolution as it relates to science and decided to find out for themselves, resulting in the books they wrote.


27 posted on 09/27/2006 10:15:57 AM PDT by RobRoy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Right Wing Professor; DoctorMichael; sinkspur; bornacatholic; VadeRetro; ahayes; ...
OK. You asked for a fight? I'll GIVE you a fight!!!

*CREVO FLYING BRICKBAT PING!!

28 posted on 09/27/2006 10:16:13 AM PDT by Al Simmons (Holocaust deniers and other anti-semites are the lowest form of human scum.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: finnman69
"These creationist goons make thinking conservatives look bad. "

And you must be one of the "thinking conservatives" who wants to stop any and all thinking in school other than that we have a great great ...grandfather that was an amoebas. (and what about the other amoebas that didn't become "thinking conservatives" such as yourself)
29 posted on 09/27/2006 10:16:20 AM PDT by razzle
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: SirLinksalot
So after 150 years, Darwinists are still looking for evidence – any evidence, no matter how skimpy – to justify their speculations.

Actually, they're not. They're trying to nail down the difficult relationships using the new genetic tools. As in, how many phyla of animals are there?

That's what makes the creationists' story line so difficult to maintain. Facts just aren't relevant to creationists. They'll still be writing this story 100 years from now, 1000 years from now, and 10,000 years from now.

After that, no one will remember what the argument was about.

30 posted on 09/27/2006 10:16:31 AM PDT by <1/1,000,000th%
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Theo
"Did you read the article? "

Yes. However, your reference to Scriptural Christianity is the issue, not Darwinism. Decendence from a common ancestor is perfectly compatible with Christianity. However, this is not true if one holds to the literal inerrancy of the Bible.
31 posted on 09/27/2006 10:17:02 AM PDT by Buck W. (If you push something hard enough, it will fall over.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: finnman69

Well, even Darwinism predicts that Darwinism is doomed. People who believe in creation are against abortion in far higher numbers than people who believe in evolution. Therefore, creationists' children are not aborted, while Darwinist babies get killed. Even a 1% lower birth rate mathmatically dooms a pool of genes over many generations... Therefore, if Darwinism is true it predicts that it's own adherents will be squeezed out of the gene pool eventually. If Darwinism is not true, it will eventually be proven false, also reducing its adherents. Either way it is doomed insofar as being the majority view.


32 posted on 09/27/2006 10:17:07 AM PDT by drangundsturm
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: sandbar
I don't think every creationist believes the earth is 10,000 years old.

You're right. A lot of them prefer a date much closer to 6,000 years.

33 posted on 09/27/2006 10:17:10 AM PDT by Coyoteman (I love the sound of beta decay in the morning!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: Al Simmons
We already dismissed the "young earth" crowd the other day through the simple expedient of demonstrating that a story that allegedly took place in Abraham's life is measurably in excess of 7,000 years.

The "young earth" crowd only give the Earth 5,100 years based on their error filled analysis of Bible stories.

They don't count, and their use as a "straw man" is ridiculous.

34 posted on 09/27/2006 10:17:23 AM PDT by muawiyah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: sandbar
It was a joke...may biblical literalists do believe that.
35 posted on 09/27/2006 10:18:04 AM PDT by oldleft
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: SirLinksalot
Darwinism teaches that we are accidental byproducts of purposeless natural processes that had no need for God

Here we go again... :( The earth is at the center of the universe. Spontaneous generation creates rats. Anyone who disagrees with these things is a liberal atheist. Why science itself is liberal! Let's just abandon all science, live in huts, and ignore any challenge to our orthodoxy.

Good heavens, it's 2006, and we're still debating if evolution is real. Sad but true. And for the record, I am a staunch Christian.

36 posted on 09/27/2006 10:18:13 AM PDT by adam_smith_76
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: sandbar

The "young earth" crowd only give it about 5,100 years, not 10,000.


37 posted on 09/27/2006 10:18:39 AM PDT by muawiyah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: drangundsturm
It doesn't quite work that way.

BTW, did you perchance think of the devastating effect on young people's religious faith that finding out that they have been sold a bunch of *BS* masquerading as science?

WELL, DID YOU???

Didn't think so.

38 posted on 09/27/2006 10:19:00 AM PDT by Al Simmons (Personal Relationship w/God = Mind Control technique designed in part to block critical thought)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: oldleft

The people you're talking about believe that it's about 5,100 years, far short of 10,000.


39 posted on 09/27/2006 10:20:43 AM PDT by muawiyah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: finnman69
A creationist goons very rarely hold "a Ph.D. in biology from the University of California at Berkeley and a Ph.D. in theology from Yale University".

Thanks for the tour offer, but I'll pass.

40 posted on 09/27/2006 10:21:49 AM PDT by skeptoid (BS, AE, AA)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: drangundsturm
Well, even Darwinism predicts that Darwinism is doomed. People who believe in creation are against abortion in far higher numbers than people who believe in evolution. Therefore, creationists' children are not aborted, while Darwinist babies get killed. Even a 1% lower birth rate mathmatically dooms a pool of genes over many generations... Therefore, if Darwinism is true it predicts that it's own adherents will be squeezed out of the gene pool eventually.

If "Darwinism" was biologically inherited that might be the case. It is not. It is a scientific field.

Nice try though.

41 posted on 09/27/2006 10:22:01 AM PDT by Coyoteman (I love the sound of beta decay in the morning!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: RobRoy

I'm not mincing words, and I don't understand your point.


42 posted on 09/27/2006 10:22:09 AM PDT by Buck W. (If you push something hard enough, it will fall over.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: adam_smith_76
BTW, the question of where the "center of the universe" might be remains open. After all, you don't know where the center is if you don't know how it's shaped.

As a practical matter you can imagine that you are at the center and move out from there. The mathematics involved supports that and numerous other conjectures.

I'm still waiting to see if they've finally disproven that it's actually shaped like a dodecahedron.

43 posted on 09/27/2006 10:22:39 AM PDT by muawiyah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: Buck W.

... help me here...

You see evolution as compatible with Christianity, but not if you believe what the Bible says?

I've always thought that the Bible was the basis of Christianity.

Is there another basis I missed in my thought process?

thanks,
ampu


44 posted on 09/27/2006 10:23:21 AM PDT by aMorePerfectUnion (outside a good dog, a book is your best friend. inside a dog it's too dark to read)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: SirLinksalot
[Sun Myung Moon]'s words, my studies, and my prayers convinced me that I should devote my life to destroying Darwinism -- Jonathan Wells


45 posted on 09/27/2006 10:23:50 AM PDT by Liberal Classic (No better friend, no worse enemy. Semper Fi.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: aMorePerfectUnion

"You see evolution as compatible with Christianity, but not if you believe what the Bible says?"

First, tell me what the Bible says.


46 posted on 09/27/2006 10:24:42 AM PDT by Buck W. (If you push something hard enough, it will fall over.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: SirLinksalot
[ Why Darwinism Is Doomed ]

That WON'T happen until Jesus comes back really really pissed off..
Its THEN the dialectic backstroke will start..

47 posted on 09/27/2006 10:24:52 AM PDT by hosepipe (CAUTION: This propaganda is laced with hyperbole.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Theo
The rest of the statement: That said, you're free to believe what you want, to your own peril.
48 posted on 09/27/2006 10:25:01 AM PDT by Frwy (Eternity without Jesus is a hell-of-a long time.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: SirLinksalot
The truth is Darwinism is not a scientific theory, but a materialistic creation myth masquerading as science. It is first and foremost a weapon against religion – especially traditional Christianity. Evidence is brought in afterwards, as window dressing.

And there you have it. Darwin was not a scientist, but an atheist bent on the destruction of all religion masquerading as a scientist.

49 posted on 09/27/2006 10:25:07 AM PDT by tacticalogic ("Oh bother!" said Pooh, as he chambered his last round.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: George W. Bush

Not sure if this topic is of interest to you, but with your natural, *AHEM*, cantankerousness, I am certain you could make a contribution to this developing donnybrook!!


50 posted on 09/27/2006 10:25:08 AM PDT by Al Simmons (Personal Relationship w/God = Mind Control technique designed in part to block critical thought)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100101-150151-200 ... 1,151-1,195 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