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 previous 1-20 ... 1,121-1,1401,141-1,1601,161-1,1801,181-1,195 last
To: Last Visible Dog

It's not a personal attack if it's true. As far as "intellectual ammuntion" goes, any intellectual aspect of this exchange went down the toilet when evidence became "in the eye of the beholder".


1,181 posted on 10/06/2006 10:41:12 AM PDT by tacticalogic ("Oh bother!" said Pooh, as he chambered his last round.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1180 | View Replies]

To: Elsie

AMEN to that!


1,182 posted on 10/06/2006 10:44:14 AM PDT by taxesareforever (Never forget Matt Maupin)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1171 | View Replies]

To: tacticalogic
any intellectual aspect of this exchange went down the toilet when evidence became "in the eye of the beholder".

You do like to flaunt your ignorance.

1,183 posted on 10/06/2006 11:38:35 AM PDT by Last Visible Dog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1181 | View Replies]

To: Last Visible Dog

I hammer idiots as a public service.


1,184 posted on 10/06/2006 11:40:42 AM PDT by tacticalogic ("Oh bother!" said Pooh, as he chambered his last round.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1183 | View Replies]

To: Last Visible Dog; tacticalogic

Hoisted up by your LEOTARD ain't too much fun, either!


1,185 posted on 10/06/2006 12:50:32 PM PDT by Elsie (Heck is where people, who don't believe in Gosh, think they are not going....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1176 | View Replies]

To: Last Visible Dog
Your spelled flatulence wrong.
1,186 posted on 10/06/2006 12:52:06 PM PDT by Elsie (Heck is where people, who don't believe in Gosh, think they are not going....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1183 | View Replies]

To: Elsie

Full-body wedgie!


1,187 posted on 10/06/2006 1:06:28 PM PDT by tacticalogic ("Oh bother!" said Pooh, as he chambered his last round.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1185 | View Replies]

To: Elsie
Your spelled flatulence wrong.

And you spelled moron wrong.

1,188 posted on 10/06/2006 1:42:42 PM PDT by Last Visible Dog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1186 | View Replies]

To: Elsie
Hoisted up by your LEOTARD ain't too much fun, either!

Like I said - some Bozo's really do like to flaunt their ignorance. Keep it up - it is fun to watch.

1,189 posted on 10/06/2006 1:44:00 PM PDT by Last Visible Dog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1185 | View Replies]

To: tacticalogic
I hammer idiots as a public service.

Actually you just make a fool out of yourself.

1,190 posted on 10/06/2006 1:44:38 PM PDT by Last Visible Dog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1184 | View Replies]

To: Last Visible Dog

All the con artist shills tell me that.


1,191 posted on 10/06/2006 2:17:49 PM PDT by tacticalogic ("Oh bother!" said Pooh, as he chambered his last round.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1190 | View Replies]

To: tacticalogic
All the con artist shills tell me that.

Do you talk to yourself often?

1,192 posted on 10/06/2006 2:19:21 PM PDT by Last Visible Dog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1191 | View Replies]

To: Last Visible Dog

Occasionally I'll grumble, and go get a bigger hammer.


1,193 posted on 10/06/2006 2:48:17 PM PDT by tacticalogic ("Oh bother!" said Pooh, as he chambered his last round.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1192 | View Replies]

To: tacticalogic
Occasionally I'll grumble, and go get a bigger hammer.


1,194 posted on 10/06/2006 4:40:24 PM PDT by Last Visible Dog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1193 | View Replies]

To: Last Visible Dog
OOOOH! You posted a PICTURE!

Seen it before. You don't have to defend what you say if you don't really say anything. It's a coward's tactic.

1,195 posted on 10/06/2006 5:43:49 PM PDT by tacticalogic ("Oh bother!" said Pooh, as he chambered his last round.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1194 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 1,121-1,1401,141-1,1601,161-1,1801,181-1,195 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