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

Skip to comments.

When and Why Anti-Darwinism First Arose
Discovery Institute ^ | June 2, 2009 | David Klinghoffer

Posted on 06/03/2009 8:22:21 AM PDT by GodGunsGuts

When and Why Anti-Darwinism First Arose

I'm a big fan of Rod Dreher. His Crunchy Con blog rarely fails to enlighten me, so I've been looking forward to his reflections on faith and science, generated by his current visit to Cambridge University as a Cambridge-Templeton fellow. Rod blogged today in response to a lecture and discussion in which evolution came up. He writes that "Darwinism wasn't initially opposed by Christians" and credits William Jennings Bryan with rallying the faithful against evolution. This is worth some further elaboration. How soon did opposition to Darwinism develop? Among whom, and why?...

(Excerpt) Read more at evolutionnews.org ...


TOPICS: Culture/Society; Miscellaneous; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: 6000years; antiscience; creation; cultofdarwin; darwindrones; evolution; evoreligion; godophobia; goodgodimnutz; intelligentdesign; jihad; junkscience; magiccreation; oldearthspeculation; religionofatheism; science; spam; templeofdarwin; voodoodance
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-79 next last

1 posted on 06/03/2009 8:22:21 AM PDT by GodGunsGuts
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: metmom; DaveLoneRanger; editor-surveyor; betty boop; Alamo-Girl; MrB; GourmetDan; Fichori; ...

Ping!


2 posted on 06/03/2009 8:23:21 AM PDT by GodGunsGuts
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: GodGunsGuts

3 posted on 06/03/2009 8:34:00 AM PDT by stormer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: GodGunsGuts
He writes that "Darwinism wasn't initially opposed by Christians" and credits William Jennings Bryan with rallying the faithful against evolution.

And I write..."It's more like evolution initially opposed God's Word".
4 posted on 06/03/2009 8:37:23 AM PDT by presently no screen name
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: GodGunsGuts

Mendel proved Darwin wrong almost immediately.


5 posted on 06/03/2009 8:38:11 AM PDT by BillT (The Gov has bankrupted my children & are not working on my grandchildren)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: GodGunsGuts
Darwin and his ideas functioned as a Rorschach test. Those who felt religious tradition to be a burden tended to see evolution as a source of liberation.

And so it is today.

6 posted on 06/03/2009 8:41:27 AM PDT by mikeus_maximus (The GOP is populated by "moderates"; conservatives are just their useful idiots. Go third party!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: GodGunsGuts

7 posted on 06/03/2009 8:41:46 AM PDT by jessduntno (July 4th, 2009. Washington DC. Gadsden Flags. Be There.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: GodGunsGuts
I'm a big fan of Rod Dreher. ... and now that you know that, you can disregard anything further I might say.
8 posted on 06/03/2009 8:45:22 AM PDT by Tax-chick (To oppose the god of this world by lifting up Christ.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: BillT

Really? I’m not a trained biologist or anything, but I’d still love to see a source backing up this claim.


9 posted on 06/03/2009 8:48:49 AM PDT by Boxen (There is no wealth like knowledge, no poverty like ignorance.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: stormer

A Temple of Darwin tent meeting where the Darwin-drones relive their evolutionary heritage with American Indians?


10 posted on 06/03/2009 8:49:16 AM PDT by GodGunsGuts
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Boxen

I am a trained biologist and I would love to see a source for that claim as well.


11 posted on 06/03/2009 8:51:35 AM PDT by allmendream ("Wealth is EARNED not distributed, so how could it be redistributed?")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: GodGunsGuts
So, basically, the anti-evolution argument boils down to:


You can't handle the truth!

12 posted on 06/03/2009 8:54:29 AM PDT by steve-b (Intelligent design is to evolutionary biology what socialism is to free-market economics.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Boxen; allmendream

The doctor will be investigating the source of that claim as soon as he puts on his rubber glove and changes the batteries in his little flashlight.


13 posted on 06/03/2009 8:56:32 AM PDT by steve-b (Intelligent design is to evolutionary biology what socialism is to free-market economics.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: steve-b

==So, basically, the anti-evolution argument boils down to: You can’t handle the truth!

You might be onto something there!:

“We take the side of science in spite of the patent absurdity of some of its constructs, in spite of its failure to fulfill many of its extravagant promises of health and life, in spite of the tolerance of the scientific community for unsubstantiated just-so stories, because we have a prior commitment, a commitment to materialism....It is not that the methods and institutions of science somehow compel us to accept a material explanation of the phenomenal world, but, on the contrary, that we are forced by our a priori adherence to material causes to create an apparatus of investigation and a set of concepts that produce material explanations, no matter how counter-intuitive, no matter how mystifying to the uninitiated. Moreover, that materialism is an absolute, for we cannot allow a Divine Foot in the door.”

—Professor Richard Lewontin, geneticist and Temple of Darwin devotee


14 posted on 06/03/2009 8:59:18 AM PDT by GodGunsGuts
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: GodGunsGuts

“Enough is enough! I’ve had it with these muthacrunchycon snakes in muthacrunchycon church!”

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ObhvOeNCKhs

A ding dang diddly darned mad Ned Flanders


15 posted on 06/03/2009 9:10:19 AM PDT by tumblindice (And let's git naked and thump some tubs, too. That should push the `unchurched' our way.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: GodGunsGuts

I would recommend these sources as to historical surveys on the Christian church’s and Protestant teaching on creation.

THE GREAT TURNING POINT by Terry Mortenson

Protestant Reformed Journal, Volume XXXVI, November 2002,
“In the Space of Six Days,” by Mark L. Shane (an excellent historical survey of the church’s teaching on creation and how reformed denominations came under the influence of Darwinism) The article is continued in the April, 2003 and November, 2003 issues.
http://www.prca.org/prtj/index.html

There are also several historical essays in the newly published: COMING TO GRIPS WITH GENESIS: BIBLICAL AUTHORITY AND THE AGE OF THE EARTH edited by Terry Mortenson PhD. and Thane H. Ury PhD.


16 posted on 06/03/2009 9:17:05 AM PDT by Madam Theophilus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Comment #17 Removed by Moderator

To: GodGunsGuts

WOW. Science Fiction and Junk Science quote of the day!


“We take the side of science in spite of the patent absurdity of some of its constructs, in spite of its failure to fulfill many of its extravagant promises of health and life, in spite of the tolerance of the scientific community for unsubstantiated just-so stories, because we have a prior commitment, a commitment to materialism....It is not that the methods and institutions of science somehow compel us to accept a material explanation of the phenomenal world, but, on the contrary, that we are forced by our a priori adherence to material causes to create an apparatus of investigation and a set of concepts that produce material explanations, no matter how counter-intuitive, no matter how mystifying to the uninitiated. Moreover, that materialism is an absolute, for we cannot allow a Divine Foot in the door.”

—Professor Richard Lewontin, geneticist and Temple of Darwin devotee


18 posted on 06/03/2009 9:22:11 AM PDT by The Spirit Of Allegiance (Public Employees: Honor Your Oaths! Defend the Constitution from Enemies--Foreign and Domestic!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: GodGunsGuts
That passage is from Richard Lewtonin's review of Carl Sagan's The Demon-Haunted World: Science as a Candle in the Dark, Billions and Billions of Demons.

The rest of the paragraph reads:

"The eminent Kant scholar Lewis Beck used to say that anyone who could believe in God could believe in anything. To appeal to an omnipotent deity is to allow that at any moment the regularities of nature may be ruptured, that miracles may happen. "
19 posted on 06/03/2009 9:23:27 AM PDT by Boxen (There is no wealth like knowledge, no poverty like ignorance.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Riodacat

That is exactly how most people feel about Darwood’s Evo-religious creation myth.


20 posted on 06/03/2009 9:24:13 AM PDT by GodGunsGuts
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: GodGunsGuts

Who’s Darwood?


21 posted on 06/03/2009 9:24:53 AM PDT by Boxen (There is no wealth like knowledge, no poverty like ignorance.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: GodGunsGuts
Quote mine to your heart's content.

Your explanation make so much more sense.

22 posted on 06/03/2009 9:30:07 AM PDT by stormer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Boxen
He is the prophet who came to tell all the intellectually unfulfilled atheists that there is no god except the natural selection god.


23 posted on 06/03/2009 9:31:06 AM PDT by GodGunsGuts
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: stormer

“Do you hear that faint noise?”
“No sir, I don’t hear a thing.”
“Listen closer.”
“Oh, I hear it now.”
“And now its gone.”
“I wonder what that was.”
“Beats me.”
“Sir, we have just learned that we ran over the HMS Beagle.”


24 posted on 06/03/2009 9:38:23 AM PDT by GodGunsGuts
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: GodGunsGuts
Are you sure that you don't mean Darwin? And that your continued use of Darwood is nothing more than juvenile name-calling?

As an aside, I think it's funny that you use a caricature of Darwin in the stead of logic or reason. Like your argument, Creation science is nothing more than a caricature of actual science.
25 posted on 06/03/2009 9:40:24 AM PDT by Boxen (There is no wealth like knowledge, no poverty like ignorance.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: GodGunsGuts
No one can claim that neo-darwinism, which is ultimately a mindless process, made our brains but yet has no relevance on the brain's contents or our existence. IOW, neo-darwinism if true, basically states we were built by a mindless process that employs primal survival and is solely responsible our thoughts and behavior. This underlying fundamental idea that deals with mankind’s very essence is what separates neo-darwinism from other scientific theories as can be seen below:

…the Darwinian process may be described as a chapter of accidents. As such, it seems simple, because you do not at first realize all that it involves. But when its significance dawns on you, your heart sinks into a heap of sand within you. There is a hideous fatalism about it, a ghastly and damnable reduction of beauty and intelligence, of strength and purpose, of honor and aspiration, to such casually picturesque changes as an avalanche may make in a mountain landscape, or a railway accident in a human figure. To call this Natural Selection is a blasphemy, possible to many for whom Nature is nothing but a casual aggregation of inert and dead matter, but eternally impossible to the spirits and souls of the righteous. If it be no blasphemy, but a truth of science, then the stars of heaven, the showers and dew, the winter and summer, the fire and heat, the mountains and hills, may no longer be called to exhaust the Lord with us by praise: their work is to modify all things by blindly starving and murdering everything that is not lucky enough to survive the eternal struggle for hogwash.
- George Bernard Shaw Back to Methuselah

In a universe of blind physical forces and genetic replication, some people are going to get hurt, other people are going to get lucky, and you won’t find any rhyme or reason in it, nor any justice. The universe we observe has precisely the properties we should expect if there is, at bottom, no design, no purpose, no evil and no good, nothing but blind pitiless indifference.
– Richard Dawkins River Out of Eden: A Darwinian View of Life

26 posted on 06/03/2009 9:46:32 AM PDT by Heartlander
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: steve-b
"Intelligent design is to evolutionary biology what socialism is to free-market economics.

Objective intelligence is to evolutionary biology what poison is to life.

27 posted on 06/03/2009 9:48:43 AM PDT by TheClintons-STILLAnti-American
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Boxen

Darwin, Darwoin, Darwood, Derwood...see, it’s evolution in action!


28 posted on 06/03/2009 9:54:21 AM PDT by GodGunsGuts
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: GodGunsGuts

bookmark


29 posted on 06/03/2009 9:54:52 AM PDT by what's up
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: GodGunsGuts

It began with the Roman author, Pliny the Elder, who believed that fossil shark teeth fell from the sky.


30 posted on 06/03/2009 9:55:31 AM PDT by <1/1,000,000th%
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Boxen
"The eminent Kant scholar Lewis Beck used to say that anyone who could believe in God could believe in anything. To appeal to an omnipotent deity is to allow that at any moment the regularities of nature may be ruptured, that miracles may happen. "

I assume Beck would reKant his statement seeing the refusal of many believers in these days to believe in macro-evolution.

31 posted on 06/03/2009 11:36:45 AM PDT by MEGoody (Ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: GodGunsGuts
This is an accurate observation by Discovery I, but like always, DI misses the big picture.

Brian's populism, fundamentalism, and isolationism was a result of the US economy shifting from agrarian to industrial.

Today, the same forces are at work because the US economy is shifting from industrial to information.

32 posted on 06/03/2009 12:12:30 PM PDT by Ben Ficklin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Ben Ficklin

Bryan was no fundamentalist. For instance, he believed that the days of creation were periods of time rather than actual earth days.


33 posted on 06/03/2009 12:35:14 PM PDT by GodGunsGuts
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: GodGunsGuts

Prosecuting Scopes makes him a fundamentalist


34 posted on 06/03/2009 1:41:25 PM PDT by Ben Ficklin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: GodGunsGuts
That is exactly how most people feel about Darwood’s Evo-religious creation myth.

Wow, now you're the majority as well as the Chosen Prophet on the Falsity of Darwinism ?

Congrats.

35 posted on 06/03/2009 1:57:53 PM PDT by jimt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: Ben Ficklin

LOL...Somehow I don’t think you are aware of what Jennings et al were objecting to. If you did, you might find yourself agreeing with them.


36 posted on 06/03/2009 2:07:52 PM PDT by GodGunsGuts
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: GodGunsGuts

Somehow I don’t think you realize the congruity between Brian’s power base and today’s GOP power base.


37 posted on 06/03/2009 2:19:32 PM PDT by Ben Ficklin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: Ben Ficklin

You have no clue what you’re talking about. Tell me, do you agree with the textbooks Br(y)an et al were objecting to???


38 posted on 06/03/2009 2:27:59 PM PDT by GodGunsGuts
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: GodGunsGuts

Any and everyone can look at your threads and know that you are dumber than a door knob.


39 posted on 06/03/2009 2:45:12 PM PDT by Ben Ficklin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: Ben Ficklin

The only way that could possibly makes sense is if you were looking in the mirror when you said that. Next time you are looking in the mirror, be sure to add copout to the description.


40 posted on 06/03/2009 2:59:14 PM PDT by GodGunsGuts
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: GodGunsGuts
Maybe you should start another thread? You reality is based on the number of threads.

I am almost 99% sure that if you had 30 creation threads daily, every high school in the US would begin teaching creation

41 posted on 06/03/2009 3:11:18 PM PDT by Ben Ficklin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: Ben Ficklin

It is clear you lack the intestinal fortitude to back up your Evo-position. Do you know what Bryan (not Brian) et al were objecting to in the Evo-textbooks at the time or not? If you do know, are you in agreement with Bryan et al’s objection to the same or not? Given your rather fragile and fidgety nature, I won’t be holding my breath waiting for your answers.


42 posted on 06/03/2009 3:35:07 PM PDT by GodGunsGuts
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: Ben Ficklin

PS And now that you mention it, I will be starting another creation thread. Thanks for the reminder.


43 posted on 06/03/2009 3:36:04 PM PDT by GodGunsGuts
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: Ben Ficklin
FYI
44 posted on 06/03/2009 3:47:38 PM PDT by Heartlander
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: GodGunsGuts
The beauty of it is that I don't have to back up my evo-position.

That is being ground out each and every day.

That's your problem. You think reality is determined by what is posted here.

45 posted on 06/03/2009 3:48:33 PM PDT by Ben Ficklin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: Ben Ficklin
You mean ground to dust. It is obvious that you have long-since made the ultimate sacrifice to the Temple of Darwinistic Materialism. I didn't realize I was talking to a full-fledged darwin-drong until just now:


46 posted on 06/03/2009 3:56:01 PM PDT by GodGunsGuts
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: GodGunsGuts
Are you going to assassinate me?
47 posted on 06/03/2009 4:07:07 PM PDT by Ben Ficklin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: steve-b

Your little simile tag-line is saying that ID destroys evolution akin to how socialism destroys free markets, YES?


48 posted on 06/03/2009 4:26:07 PM PDT by alstewartfan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Ben Ficklin
To paraphrase Berlinski (a secular jew); if we were to replace the word evolution with ‘allah’ and the label of creationist with ‘infidel’ - I don’t think these discussions would read significantly different. But this obviously offends those who use the ‘creationist label‘ because it associates Darwinism with religion as it should in some cases. And science has quite a few creation stories . (I’ve got more) Disclaimer: I am not a creationist – but I am a Christian.

Now let me ask you a simple question, do you believe that human consciousness ‘ultimately’ came from mindlessness?

49 posted on 06/03/2009 4:48:27 PM PDT by Heartlander
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: Heartlander

What do you think?


50 posted on 06/03/2009 4:52:43 PM PDT by Ben Ficklin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 49 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-79 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