More scientists express doubts on Darwin

WorldNetDaily.com ^ | June 22, 2006 1:00 a.m. Eastern

[ConservaTexan]

Believe what you want! Teach creation in church where it belongs and evolution in science class where it belongs.

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.

[orionblamblam]

> More than 600 scientists holding doctoral degrees ...

... in what? That is kind of important.

[Fester Chugabrew]

To the extent evolution attempts to reconstruct millions of years of unobserved, unrecorded (by humans), and untestable history it is better suited as a philosophy of history class, not a science class. Or, I suppose one could stretch what is accepted as "science" to include knowledge regarding astrology, psychology, sociology, etc. Evolutionists tend to confuse their interpretation of the facts with the facts themselves, and then play the part of chagrined when the rest of the world is not bamboozled by their lack of ability to distinguish between the two.

[Junior]

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.

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.

[fortheDeclaration]

If you are a Young-Earth Creationist, accept the water canopy theory, do not accept speciation (i.e. Ken Ham’s “kinds”), and want on my Six Days Ping List, Freepmail me.

Could you explain what problem you have with speciation (kinds).

[orionblamblam]

[wolfcreek]

Why don't these 'More than 600 scientists holding doctoral degrees' come up with their own theory?

[Coyoteman]

Heck, dogs clearly are most closely related to wolves, but there are still wolves.

I'm descended from Europeans. Why are there still Europeans?

(Your post was a good addition to what I posted on theory.)

[Echo Talon]

Finally, the Theory of Evolution isn't a popularity contest.

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)

[RightWhale]

to pose as a philosopher

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.

[brytlea]

LOL the European analogy is even better!
susie

[Echo Talon]

This easy to fix. Any scientist expressing doubts about Darwin is excommunicated by the holy order of the scientific community. Therefore no "scientists" have any doubts about Darwin.

Refuse Darwin as your Savior and lose ALL funding!

All your funding are belong to US!

[tomzz]

The PBS promotion claimed "virtually every scientist in the world believes the theory to be true."

PBS = WDNC; the suckers basically hand their donor rolls straight over to the DNC and our tax dollars pay for it. Unbelievable.

[Coyoteman]

although there is no evidence in the fossil record...

False. See below:

---

Fossil: KNM-ER 3733

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

[Tim Long]

I believe you mean abiogenesis. Parthenogenesis is basically virgin birth.

[Realism]

Poor Galileo. I can only imagine what the guy was up against.

[PatrickHenry]

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.

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."

[Deadshot Drifter]

Nobody in the biological sciences, medicine included, needs Darwinism at all, he added

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.

[Stultis]

"Dissent from Darwinism has gone global," said Discovery Institute President Bruce Chapman.

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.

[ThinkDifferent]

there is no evidence in the fossil record, as Darwin said there should be, to subsatntiate the theory.

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.