Posted on 06/22/2006 1:28:41 PM PDT by Tim Long
600 dissenters sign on challenging claims about support for theory
More than 600 scientists holding doctoral degrees have gone on the record expressing skepticism about Darwin's theory of evolution and calling for critical examination of the evidence cited in its support.
All are signatories to the Scientific Dissent From Darwinism statement, which reads: "We are skeptical of claims for the ability of random mutation and natural selection to account for the complexity of life. Careful examination of the evidence for Darwinian theory should be encouraged."
The statement, which includes endorsement by members of the prestigious U.S. National Academy of Sciences and Russian Academy of Sciences, was first published by the Seattle-based Discovery Institute in 2001 to challenge statements about Darwinian evolution made in promoting PBS's "Evolution" series.
The PBS promotion claimed "virtually every scientist in the world believes the theory to be true."
The list of 610 signatories includes scientists from National Academies of Science in Russia, Czech Republic, Hungary, India (Hindustan), Nigeria, Poland, Russia and the United States. Many of the signers are professors or researchers at major universities and international research institutions such as Cambridge University, British Museum of Natural History, Moscow State University, Masaryk University in Czech Republic, Hong Kong University, University of Turku in Finland, Autonomous University of Guadalajara in Mexico, University of Stellenbosch in South Africa, Institut de Paleontologie Humaine in France, Chitose Institute of Science & Technology in Japan, Ben-Gurion University in Israel, MIT, The Smithsonian and Princeton.
"Dissent from Darwinism has gone global," said Discovery Institute President Bruce Chapman. "Darwinists used to claim that virtually every scientist in the world held that Darwinian evolution was true, but we quickly started finding U.S. scientists that disproved that statement. Now we're finding that there are hundreds, and probably thousands, of scientists all over the world that don't subscribe to Darwin's theory."
The Discovery Institute is the leading promoter of the theory of Intelligent Design, which has been at the center of challenges in federal court over the teaching of evolution in public school classes. Advocates say it draws on recent discoveries in physics, biochemistry and related disciplines that indicate some features of the natural world are best explained as the product of an intelligent cause rather than an undirected process such as natural selection.
"I signed the Scientific Dissent From Darwinism statement because I am absolutely convinced of the lack of true scientific evidence in favor of Darwinian dogma," said Raul Leguizamon, M.D., pathologist and professor of medicine at the Autonomous University of Guadalajara, Mexico.
"Nobody in the biological sciences, medicine included, needs Darwinism at all," he added. "Darwinism is certainly needed, however, in order to pose as a philosopher, since it is primarily a worldview. And an awful one, as Bernard Shaw used to say."
Please clarify, should it be taught as fact or as theory? It is presented as fact in schools today although there is no evidence in the fossil record, as Darwin said there should be, to subsatntiate the theory.
> More than 600 scientists holding doctoral degrees ...
... in what? That is kind of important.
I wonder how many biologists were among them. This looks like a rehash of the long-discredited "400 scientists" canard. Of course, Project Steve has 744 scientists named "Steve" saying evolution is a well-supported theory. Since people named "Steve" represent about 1 percent of the population, it's evident that 74,400 scientists support evolution.
Betcha World Nut Daily doesn't report that.
Could you explain what problem you have with speciation (kinds).
I'm descended from Europeans. Why are there still Europeans?
(Your post was a good addition to what I posted on theory.)
oh yea...?
the·o·ry Audio pronunciation of "theory" ( P )
Pronunciation Key (th-r, thîr)
n. pl. the·o·ries
1. A set of statements or principles devised to explain a group of facts or phenomena, especially one that has been repeatedly tested or is widely accepted and can be used to make predictions about natural phenomena.
2. The branch of a science or art consisting of its explanatory statements, accepted principles, and methods of analysis, as opposed to practice: a fine musician who had never studied theory.
3. A set of theorems that constitute a systematic view of a branch of mathematics.
4. Abstract reasoning; speculation: a decision based on experience rather than theory.
5. A belief or principle that guides action or assists comprehension or judgment: staked out the house on the theory that criminals usually return to the scene of the crime.
6. An assumption based on limited information or knowledge; a conjecture.(This this really what ToE is)
Actual philosophers tend to discuss philosophy, although sometimes they get into more personal things such as Schopenhauer wondering why Hegel attracted most of the students and he, Schopenhauer, did not. Principle of sufficient reason.
LOL the European analogy is even better!
susie
Refuse Darwin as your Savior and lose ALL funding!
All your funding are belong to US!
PBS = WDNC; the suckers basically hand their donor rolls straight over to the DNC and our tax dollars pay for it. Unbelievable.
False. See below:
Site: Koobi Fora (Upper KBS tuff, area 104), Lake Turkana, Kenya (4, 1)
Discovered By: B. Ngeneo, 1975 (1)
Estimated Age of Fossil: 1.75 mya * determined by Stratigraphic, faunal, paleomagnetic & radiometric data (1, 4)
Species Name: Homo ergaster (1, 7, 8), Homo erectus (3, 4, 7), Homo erectus ergaster (25)
Gender: Female (species presumed to be sexually dimorphic) (1, 8)
Cranial Capacity: 850 cc (1, 3, 4)
Information: Tools found in same layer (8, 9). Found with KNM-ER 406 A. boisei (effectively eliminating single species hypothesis) (1)
Interpretation: Adult (based on cranial sutures, molar eruption and dental wear) (1)
See original source for notes:
Source: http://www.mos.org/evolution/fossils/fossilview.php?fid=33
I believe you mean abiogenesis. Parthenogenesis is basically virgin birth.
Poor Galileo. I can only imagine what the guy was up against.
This is a woeful update of the Discovery Institute's pathetic list of 500 evolution skeptics, of whom about one-third were said to be biologists. It seems they've found a hundred more clowns. The whole sad thing was analyzed in point 4 of my lead article at the start of this thread: Conclusions From Uncounted Creation/Evolution Debates. The conclusion was: The actual comparison is 46,600 biologists who accept evolution and a mere 154 who are "skeptical."
He's right. Some do however need to know a little about evolution. Especially those studing viruses.
I wonder if this dude plans to get a vaccination shot for the flu this year.
Nice to know a pathologist, from an independent university no less, has signed the dissent list.
Desperate times for the DI when they have to resort to WorldNetDaily to carry their water for them.
Just wait until they translate the "Dissent From Darwinism" statement into Arabic, Farsi, Punjabi and other Islamic languages. Then it will really explode. (Figuratively... I hope.)
Seriously, however, I'm a full-bore Darwinian evolutionist and I would be able to sign this statement. (Where it not for the political agenda behind it.) It doesn't actually contradict Darwinism, since Darwinian evolution has always included more mechanisms than natural selection and random mutation.
Ludicrously false. It's one thing to say that you don't find the evidence persuasive, or that you place greater weight on the Bible. But anyone who claims that there is *no* evidence for evolution in the fossil record is either woefully misinformed or making deliberate misrepresentations.
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.