Published with
permission, view the entire EVOLUTION CRUNCHER book with illustrations
online here
paperback is
also available inexpensively at www.evolution-facts.org
Scientific facts which annihilate evolutionary theory
The Evolution Cruncher
Chapter 23 Part 2 of 2
Scientists Speak
4 - SCIENTISTS DECLARE EVOLUTION TO BE
UNWORKABLE AND USELESS
Not only is evolution entirely an hypothesis, it is a most
peculiar one.
This is the conclusion of a number of conscientious scientists. They have spent years trying to work
with an unworkable theory, and they want it discarded entirely.
Instead
of ignoring the growing opposition to evolutionary theory, researchers need to
consider the overwhelming mass of evidence in opposition to it. We need to
stop letting this sacred cow walk through our halls of science.
"Fundamental
truths about evolution have so far eluded us all, and that uncritical
acceptance of Darwinism may be counterproductive as well as expedient. Far from
ignoring or ridiculing the ground-swell of opposition to Darwinism that is
growing, for example, in the
[1] IT IS AN UNWORKABLE HYPOTHESIS
We
know so little now, and apparently little more is likely be learned.
"We
still do not know the mechanics of evolution in spite of the over-confident
claims in some quarters, nor are we likely to make further progress in this by
the classical methods of paleontology or biology."—*Errol White,
Proceedings of the Linnean Society,
All
we have is faith to go on, for there are no facts.
"The
hypothesis that life has developed from inorganic matter is, at present, still
an article of faith."—*J.W.N. Sullivan, The Limitations of Science
(1933), p. 95.
A
leading evolutionist writer says: If it does not fit in with reality, it has
nothing to do with science.
"It
is inherent in any definition of science that statements that cannot be checked
by observation are not really saying anything—or at least they are not
science."—*George Gaylord Simpson, "The Nonprevalence of
Humanoids," in Science 143 (1964) p. 770.
It
is a theory that stands in splendid isolation from experiment and evidence.
"In
accepting evolution as fact, how many biologists pause to reflect that science
is built upon theories that have been proved by experiment to be correct, or
remember that the theory of animal evolution has never been thus
proved."—*L.H. Matthews, "Introduction," Origin of the
Species, Charles Darwin (1971 edition).
Does
not stand up at all.
"I
have always been slightly suspicious of the theory of evolution because of its
ability to account for any property of living beings (the long neck of the
giraffe, for example). I have therefore tried to see whether biological
discoveries over the last thirty years or so fit in with
It
is an assortment of pipe dreams.
"Unfortunately,
in the field of evolution most explanations are not good. As a matter of fact,
they hardy qualify as explanations at all; they are suggestions, hunches, pipe
dreams, hardy worthy of being called hypotheses."—*Norman Macbeth,
[2] IT IS A USELESS HYPOTHESIS
It
is only a formula for classifying imaginative ideas.
"I
argue that the ‘theory of evolution’ does not take predictions, so far as
ecology is concerned, but is instead a logical formula which can be used only
to classify empiricisms [theories] and to show the relationships which such a
classification implies . . these theories are actually tautologies and, as
such, cannot make empirically testable predictions. They are not scientific
theories at all."—*R.H. Peters, "Tautology in Evolution and
Ecology," American Naturalist (1976), Vol. 110, No. 1, p. 1 [emphasis
his].
It
does not belong in the realm of science.
"A
hypothesis is empirical and scientific only if it can be tested by experience .
. A hypothesis or theory which cannot be, at least in principle, falsified by
empirical observations and experiments does not belong to the realm of
science."—*Francis J. Ayala, "Biological Evolution: Natural
Selection or Random Walk?" American Scientist, Vol. 82, Nov.-Dec. 1974, p.
700.
Posterity
will marvel at 20th-century scientists.
"Posterity
will marvel that so very flimsy and dubious an hypothesis [Darwinism] could be
accepted with the credulity that it has. I think . . this age is one of the
most credulous in history."—Malcolm Muggeridge, The End of Christendom
(1980), p. 59.
Creation
fits the facts while evolution has yet to find any that proves it.
"A
theory loses credibility if it must be repeatedly modified over years of
testing or if it requires excuses being continually made for why its
predictions are not consistent with new discoveries of data. It is not a
propitious attribute for a theory to have required numerous secondary
modifications. Some evolutionists misunderstand this and attempt to point to
the continuous string of modifications to evolution theory as a justification
for classifying it as the exclusive respectable scientific theory on origins.
They often make the strange claim that creation theory could not be scientific
because it fits the evidence so perfectly that it never has required any
modification. That line of reasoning is like saying that the law of gravity is
not scientific since it fits the facts so perfectly that it never needs
modification."—Luther Sunderland,
The
label on the outside of the package may say "knowledge," but inside
it is empty.
"I
feel that the effect of the hypotheses of common ancestry in systematics has
not been merely boring, not just a lack of knowledge; I think it has been
positively anti-knowledge . . Well, what about evolution? It certainly has the
function of knowledge but does it convey any? Well, we are back to the question
I have been putting to people, ‘Is there one thing you can tell me about
evolution?’ The absence of answers seems to suggest that it is true, evolution
does not convey any knowledge."—*Colin Patterson, Address at the
The
great myth of our century.
"Ultimately,
the Darwinian theory of evolution is no more nor less than the great cosmogenic
myth of the twentieth century."—*Michael Denton, Evolution: A Theory in
Crisis (1985), p. 358.
That
which retards scientific study.
"Science
has been seriously retarded by the study of what is not worth knowing."—*Johann
van Goethe (1749-1832), quoted in Asimov’s Book of Science and Nature
Quotations, p. 257.
5 - SCIENTISTS MAINTAIN THAT EVOLUTION HINDERS SCIENCE
Thoughtful
scientists have concluded that, not only is evolutionary theory a total waste
of time, but it has greatly hindered scientific advancement as well. Scientists work at a great disadvantage,
try to make everything fit the theory, and ignore the mass of evidence which
does not.
It
is totally useless.
"Evolutionism
is a fairy tale for grown-ups. This theory has helped nothing in the progress
of science. It is useless."—*Bounoure, Le Monde et la Vie (October
1983) [Director of Research at the National
It
is a serious obstruction to biological science, and everything must be forced
to fit it.
"The
evolution theory can by no means be regarded as an innocuous natural
philosophy, but rather is a serious obstruction to biological research. It
obstructs—as has been repeatedly shown—the attainment of consistent results,
even from uniform experimental material. For everything must ultimately be
forced to fit this theory. An exact biology cannot, therefore, be built
up."—*H. Neilsson, Synthetische Artbildng, 1954, p. 11
It
has resulted in a scientific retreat from factual thinking.
"The
doctrine of continuity [evolutionary theory] has always necessitated a retreat
from pure empiricism [facts and scientific testing], and contrary to what is
widely assumed by evolutionary biologists today, it has always been the
anti-evolutionists, not the evolutionists, in the scientific community who have
stuck rigidly to the facts and adhered to a more strictly empirical
approach."—*Michael Denton, Evolution: A Theory in Crisis (1985), p.
353.
It
has produced a decline in scientific integrity.
"I
am not satisfied that
6 - SCIENTISTS SPEAK ABOUT
In
this section, we shall listen to what scientists have to say about *Charles
Darwin and his writings.
*John
Dewey, the leader of "progressive education" and a confirmed
evolutionist, said that *
"The
Origin of Species introduced a mode of thinking that in the end was
bound to transform the logic of knowledge, and hence the treatment of morals,
politics, and religion."—*John Dewey, "The Influence of Darwinism
on Philosophy," in Great Essays in Science, p. 18 (1957).
*Mora
explains that all of
"Unfortunately
for
*
"Paleontologists
have paid an exorbitant price for
If
one tiger is "fitter" than another, that does not prove that it
evolved from something, or is evolving into something else.
"
*
"It
seems that the standards of the evolutionary theorists are relative or
comparative rather than absolute. If such a theorist makes a suggestion that is
better than other suggestions, or better than nothing, he feels that he has
accomplished something even if his suggestion will obviously not hold water. He
does not believe that he must meet any objective standards of logic, reason, or
probability."—*Norman Macbeth,
His
theories have been found to be inadequate, outmoded, and invalid.
"I
assert only that the mechanism of evolution suggested by Charles Darwin has
been found inadequate by the professionals, and that they have moved on to
other views and problems. In brief, classical Darwinism is no longer considered
valid by qualified biologists."—*N. Macbeth,
*Darwin
himself admitted that the evidence for evolution—which should be found
in the fossil strata—simply was not there.
"Charles
Darwin, himself the father of evolution in his later days, gradually became
aware of the lack of real evidence for his evolutionary speculation and wrote:
‘As by this theory, innumerable transitional forms must have existed, why do we
not find them embedded in the crust of the earth? Why is not all nature in
confusion instead of being, as we see them, well-defined species?’ "—*H.
Enoch, Evolution or Creation (1968), p. 139.
Darwinism
is a belief in the meaninglessness of existence.
"Darwinism
is a creed not only with scientists committed to document the all-purpose role
of natural selection. It is a creed with masses of people who have at best a
vague notion of the mechanism of evolution as proposed by
*
" A
great deal of this work [research work stimulated by Darwinism] was directed
into unprofitable channels or devoted to the pursuit of
will-o’-the-wisps."—*W.R. Thompson (Introduction),
*
"The
origin of all diversity among living beings remains a mystery as totally
unexplained as if the book of Mr. Darwin had never been written, for no theory
unsupported by fact, however plausible it may appear, can be admitted in
silence."—*L.
*
"When
I was asked to write an introduction replacing the one prepared a quarter of a
century ago by the distinguished Darwinian, Sir Anthony Keith [one of the
"discoverers" of Piltdown Man], I felt extremely hesitant to accept
the invitation . . I am not satisfied that
"He
merely showed, on the basis of certain facts and assumptions, how this might
have happened, and as he had convinced himself he was able to convince others.
"But
the facts and interpretations on which
"This
general tendency to eliminate, by mean of unverifiable speculations, the limits
of the categories Nature presents to us is the inheritance of biology from The
Origin of Species. To establish the continuity required by the theory,
historical arguments are invoked, even though historical evidence is lacking.
Thus are engendered those fragile towers of hypothesis based on hypothesis,
where fact and fiction intermingle in an inextricable confusion."—*W.R.
Thompson, "Introduction," to Everyman’s Library issue of Charles
Darwin, Origin of Species (1958 edition).
*Himmelfarb
spent years analyzing *
"[
An
ever-higher mountain of speculations was gradually erected by *
"[In
*Kuyper,
a contemporary of *
"The
doctrine of evolution is a newly invented system, a newly concerted doctrine, a
newly formed dogma, a new rising belief which places itself over against the
Christian faith and can only found its temple on the ruins of our Christian
confession."—*Dr. Abraham Kuyper, "Evolution," speech
delivered in 1899.
Evolutionary
theory may not be the root of the tree of evil, but it lies close to it. The
root is the love of evil; evolution provides an excuse for continuing that
indulgence.
"This
monkey mythology of
*
"[
While
he was alive, *
[In a
letter written to Asa Gray, a Harvard professor of biology:] "I am quite
conscious that my speculations run quite beyond the bounds of true
science."—*Charles Darwin, quoted in *N.C. Gillespie, Charles Darwin and
the Problem of Creation (1918), p. 2 [
It
is all just a myth.
"Ultimately
the Darwinian theory of evolution is no more nor less than the great cosmogenic
myth of the twentieth century . . the origin of life and of new beings on earth
is still largely as enigmatic as when
A
century and a half of research has provided not one whit of evidence.
"The
problem of the origin of species has not advanced in the last 150 years. One
hundred and fifty years have already passed during which it has been said that
the evolution of the species is a fact but, without giving real proofs of it
and without even a principle of explaining it. During the last one hundred and
fifty years of research that has been carried out along this line [in order to
prove the theory], there has been no discovery of anything. It is simply a
repetition in different ways of what Darwin said in 1859. This lack of results
is unforgivable in a day when molecular biology has really opened the veil
covering the mystery of reproduction and heredity . .
"Finally,
there is only one attitude which is possible as I have just shown: It consists
in affirming that intelligence comes before life. Many people will say, this is
not science, it is philosophy. The only thing I am interested in is fact, and
this conclusion comes out of an analysis and observation of the facts."—*G.
Salet, Hasard et Certitude: Le Transformisme devani la Biologie Actuelle
(1973), p. 331.
Fallacious
solutions without any real answers.
"The
theory of evolution gives no answer to the important problem of the origin of
life and presents only fallacious solutions to the problem of the nature of
evolutive transformations."—*Jean Rostand, quoted in *G. Salet, Hasard
et Certitude: Le Tiansformisme devani la Biologie Actuelle (1973), p. 419.
It
is too easy to complacently think that a theory has, with the passing of time,
changed into a fact.
"Because
scientists believe in Darwinism, there is a strong social tendency in this kind
of situation for everybody to become satisfied with a weak explanation."—*Op.
cit., p. 22
Haugton
is quoted as having said this to *Darwin in 1858, a year before the publication of Origln:
"When
Darwin presented a paper [with Alfred Wallace] to the Linnean Society in 1858,
a Professor Haugton of Dublin remarked, ‘All that was new was false, and what
was true was old.’ This, we think, will be the final verdict on the matter, the
epitaph on Darwinism."—*Fred Hoyle and N. Chandra Wickramasinghe,
Evolution from Space (1981), p. 159.
Haugton
is also quoted as having said this to * Darwin:
[Speaking
to Darwin:] "[If your theory accomplishes what you intend,] humanity, in
my mind, would suffer a damage that might brutalize it, and sink the human race
into a lower grade of degradation than any into which it has fallen, since its
written records tell us of its history."—*Ibid.
7 - ONLY
TWO ALTERNATIVES
One
thing is certain: If scientists—and the rest of us—decide not to accept the
folly of evolution, the only alternative is creation. If stars, planets,
plants, animals, and men did not make themselves,—then the only alternative is that
God made them!
"Either
evolutionary change or miraculous divine intervention lies at the back of human
intelligence."—*S. Zuckerman, Functional Activities of Man, Monkeys and
Apes (1933), p. 155.
Either
God created everything, or everything made or evolved itself.
"Such
explanations tend to fall into one or the other of two broad categories:
special creation or evolution. Various admixtures and modifications of these
two concepts exist, but it seems impossible to imagine an explanation of
origins that lies completely outside the two ideas."—*Davis and *E.
Solomon, The World of Biology (1974), p. 395.
Everywhere
we turn, in the animate and inanimate, we see specific design and careful
purpose. Only an Intelligent Being of massive intellect and understanding could
have produced it all.
"Honest
thinkers must see, if they investigate, that only an infallible Mind could have
adjusted our world and its life in its amazing intricacies."—Paul
Francis Kerr, quoted in F. Meldau, Why We Believe in Creation, Not Evolution,
pp. 50-51.
There
are no other possibilities. "Organisms either appeared on the earth fully
developed or they did not."
"Creation
and evolution, between them, exhaust the possible explanations for the origin
of living things. Organisms either appeared on the earth fully developed or
they did not . . If they did appear in a fully developed state, they must have
been created by some omnipotent intelligence."—*D.J. Futuyma, Science
on Trial (1983), p. 197.
Evolutionary
theory is not a science, for it has no facts to support it.
"The
fact of evolution is the backbone of biology, and biology is thus in the
peculiar position of being a science founded on an unproved theory. Is it then
a science or faith? Belief in the theory of evolution is thus exactly parallel
to belief in special creation—both are concepts which believers know to be true
but neither, up to the present, has been capable of proof."—*L.H.
Matthews, "Introduction" to The Origin of Species by Charles Darwin,
pp. x, xi (1971 edition).
The
alternative theory, Creation, has the facts to support it.
"I
think, however, that we must go further than this and admit that the only
acceptable explanation is creation. I know that this is anathema to physicists,
as indeed it is to me, but we must not reject a theory that we do not like if
the experimental evidence supports it."—*H. Lipson, "A Physicist
Looks at Evolution," Physics Bulletin 31 (1980), p. 138.
The
two cannot (cannot!) be reconciled. Either one must be accepted and the second
rejected, or the second must be accepted and the first rejected. And the facts
are only on one side.
"The
creation account in Genesis and the theory of evolution could not be
reconciled. One must be right and the other wrong. The story of the fossils
agreed with the account of Genesis. In the oldest rocks we did not find a
series of fossils covering the gradual changes from the most primitive
creatures to developed forms; but rather in the oldest rocks, developed species
suddenly appeared. Between every species there was a complete absence of
intermediate fossils."—D.B. Gower, "Scientist Rejects Evolution,"
Kentish Times, England December 11, 1975, p. 4 [biochemist].
The
concept that the universe has no origin, no plan, and no norms—produces people
with no purpose, no fulfillment, and no future.
"It
was because Darwinian theory broke man’s link with God and set him adrift in a
cosmos without purpose or end that its impact was so fundamental. No other
intellectual revolution in modern times . . so profoundly affected the way men
viewed themselves and their place in the universe."—*Michael Denton,
Evolution: A Theory in Crisis (1985), p. 87 [Australian molecular biologist].
There
are two alternatives, and no third one.
"The
reasonable view was to believe in spontaneous generation; the only alternative,
to believe in a single, primary act of supernatural creation. There is no third
position."—*George Wald, "Origin of Life," Scientific
American, August 1954, p. 48.
8 - EVOLUTION IS A RELIGIOUS FAITH
The
charge is frequently made that belief in a Creator and creation is merely part
of "religion" and devoid of scientific evidence. Throughout these
series of books we have clearly observed that all the evidence is on the side
of creation, not evolution. Now we shall learn that it is evolution which is
a religious faith. Yes, it is true that there are religious people who
believe in creation, but it does not take religiosity to accept scientific
evidence. On the other hand, it requires the religious fervor of
evolutionary theory to reject all that evidence and cling instead to a myth.
Darwinism
is a mythology all in its own.
"With
the failure of these many efforts, science was left in the somewhat
embarrassing position of having to postulate theories of living origins which
it could not demonstrate. After having chided the theologian for his reliance
on myth and miracle, science found itself in the unenviable position of having
to create a mythology of its own: namely, the assumption that what, after long
effort, could not be proved to take place today had, in truth, taken place in
the primeval past."—*Loran Eisley, The Immense Journey (1957), p. 199.
It
is a faith.
"[The
theory of evolution] forms a satisfactory faith on which to base our
interpretation of nature."—*L. Harrison Matthews, "Introduction to
Origin of Species," pp. xxii (1977 edition).
Evolution
makes man into his own god. It is "a non-theistic religion."
"Humanism
is the belief that man shapes his own destiny. It is a constructive philosophy,
a non-theistic religion, a way of life."—*American Humanist
Association, promotional brochure.
This
bewitching power that captivates men so that they will live and die in defense
of pointless thinking and factless theory is termed by them a
"religion."
"It
is a religion of science that Darwinism chiefly held, and holds over men’s
minds."—*Encounter, November 1959, p. 48.
A
co-developer of the Piltdown Man hoax, said this:
"A
Belief in Evolution is a basal doctrine in the Rationalists’ Liturgy."—*Sir
Arthur Keith, Darwinism and its Critics (1935), p. 53.
The
theory of evolution, up the ladder from simple organisms to more complex ones,—requires a level of faith not based
on fact; this is astonishing.
"If
complex organisms ever did evolve from simpler ones, the process took place
contrary to the laws of nature, and must have involved what may rightly be
termed the miraculous."—*R.E.D. Clark, Victoria Institute, 1943, p. 63.
Is
evolution, then, a science or a faith? Lacking evidence for its support, what
is it?
"The
fact of evolution is the backbone of biology, and biology is thus in the
peculiar position of being a science founded on an unproved theory. Is it then
a science or faith?"—*L.N. Matthews, "Introduction" to
*Charles Darwin, Origin of the Species (1971 edition), pp. x, xi (1971
edition).
There
are thousands of facts in support of creation and the existence of the Creator
who made that creation. But evolution is a solo fide; it is by faith
alone.
"The
more one studies paleontology, the more certain one becomes that evolution is
based on faith alone . . exactly the same sort of faith which it is necessary
to have when one encounters the great mysteries of religion."—*Louis
Trenchark More, quoted in Science and the Two-tailed Dinosaur, p. 33.
The
best description of the facts discovered by geologists—is to be found in the book of
Genesis.
"If
I as a geologist were called upon to explain briefly our modern ideas of the
origin of the earth and the development of life on it to a simple, pastoral,
people such as the tribes to whom the Book of Genesis was addressed, I could
hardly do better than follow rather closely much of the language of the first
chapter of Genesis."—*Wallace Pratt, quoted by W.L. Copithorne, in
"The Worlds of Wallace Pratt," The Lamp, Fall 1971, p. 14.
After
looking over all the evidence, the Genesis account of creation is far more
believable than is the evolutionary tale.
"Given
the facts, our existence seems quite improbable—more miraculous, perhaps, than
the seven-day wonder of Genesis."—*Judith Hooper, "Perfect
Timing," New Age Journal, Vol. 11, December 1985, p. 18.
*Rifkin
glories in the fact that, because of evolutionary theory, he no longer needs to
justify his behavior to any Higher Being. He desires to be the god in his own
universe.
"We
no longer feel ourselves to be guests in someone else’s home and therefore
obliged to make our behavior conform with a set of preexisting cosmic rules. It
is our creation now. We make the rules. We establish the parameters of reality.
We create the world; and because we do, we no longer feel beholden to outside
forces. We no longer have to justly our behavior, for we are now the architects
of the universe. We are responsible to nothing outside ourselves; for we are
the kingdom, the power, and the glory forever and ever."—*Jeremy
Rifkin, Algeny (1983), p. 244.
*Rifkin
tells us that "evolution somehow magically creates greater overall value
and order." In blatant violation of the Second Law of Thermodynamics,
*Rifkin sees all disorder producing more perfect order.
"We
believe that evolution somehow magically creates greater overall value and
order on earth. Now that the environment we live in is becoming so dissipated
and disordered that it is apparent to the naked eye, we are beginning for the
first time to have second thoughts about our views on evolution, progress, and
the creation of things of material value . . Evolution means the creation of
larger and larger islands of order at the expense of ever greater seas of
disorder in the world. There is not a single biologist or physicist who can
deny this central truth. Yet, who is willing to stand up in a classroom or before
a public forum and admit it?"—*Jeremy Rifkin, Entropy: A New World View
(1980), p. 55.
Evolution
has became a scientific religion which men come and bow before and yield their
reasoning powers.
"In
fact [subsequent to the publication of Darwin’s book, Origin of Species],
evolution became in a sense a scientific religion; almost all scientists have
accepted it and many are prepared to ‘bend’ their observations to fit with it .
. To my mind, the theory does not stand up at all . . If living matter is not,
then, caused by the interplay of atoms, natural forces, and radiation, how has
it come into being? . . I think, however, that we must go further than this and
admit that the only acceptable explanation is creation. I know that this is
anathema to physicists, as indeed it is to me; but we must not reject a theory
that we do not like if the experimental evidence supports it."—*H.S.
Lipson, "A Physicist Looks at Evolution," Physics Bulletin, Vol. 31,
p. 138 (1980) [emphasis his].
We
do not know how it could have happened, we have no evidence, and appealing to
it as our religion is no solution.
"We
still do not know the mechanics of evolution in spite of the over-confident
claims in some quarters, nor are we likely to make further progress in this by
the classical method of paleontology or biology; and we shall certainly not
advance matters by jumping up and down shrilling, ‘Darwin is god and I,
So-and-so, am his prophet.’—The recent researches of workers like Dean and
Henshelwood (1964) already suggest the possibility of incipient cracks in the
seemingly monolithic walls of the neo-Darwinian Jericho."—*Errol White,
Proceedings of the Linnean Society, London 177:8 (1966).
The
theory is merely an article of faith, part of the atheistic creed.
"The
hypothesis that life has developed from inorganic matter is, at present, still
an article of faith."—*J.W.N. Sullivan, Limitations of Science (1933),
p. 95.
It
has become an orthodoxy that is preached with religious fervor. Only those
lacking in faith hesitate to accept this theory with no evidence supporting it.
"Today
the tables are fumed. The modified, but still characteristically, Darwinian
theory has itself become an orthodoxy. Preached by its adherents with religious
fervour and doubted, they feel, only by a few muddlers imperfect in scientific
faith."—*M. Grene, "Faith of Darwinism," Encounter, November
1959, p. 49.
It
takes plenty of faith, boys, plenty of faith.
"Evolution
requires plenty of faith: a faith in L-proteins that defy chance formation; a
faith in the formation of DNA codes which if generated spontaneously would
spell only pandemonium; a faith in a primitive environment that in reality
would fiendishly devour any chemical precursors to life; a faith in experiments
that prove nothing but the need for intelligence in the beginning; a faith in a
primitive ocean that would not thicken but would only hopelessly dilute
chemicals; a faith in natural laws of thermodynamics and biogenesis that
actually deny the possibility for the spontaneous generation of life; a faith
in future scientific revelations that when realized always seem to present more
dilemmas to the evolutionist; faith in improbabilities that treasonously tell
two stories—one denying evolution, the other confirming the creator; faith in
transformations that remain fixed; faith in mutations and natural selection
that add to a double negative for evolution; faith in fossils that
embarrassingly show fixity through time, regular absence of transitional forms
and striking testimony to a worldwide water deluge; a faith in time which
proves to only promote degradation in the absence of mind; and faith in
reductionism that ends up reducing the materialist’s arguments to zero and
facing the need to invoke a supernatural creator."—R.L. Wysong, The
Creation-Evolution Controversy (1981), p. 455.
Evolution
would require incredible miracles, and it matters not whether they be fast or
slow, they would still be incredible miracles.
"Slowness
has really nothing to do with the question. An event is not any more
intrinsically intelligible or unintelligible because of the pace at which it
moves. For a man who does not believe in a miracle, a slow miracle would be
just as incredible as a swift one."—*G.K. Chesterton (1925).
By
deifying *Darwin, men have retarded the progress of science.
"Just
as pre-Darwinian biology was carried out by people whose faith was in the
Creator and His plan, post-Darwinian biology is being carried out by people
whose faith is in, almost, the deity of Darwin. They’ve seen their task as to
elaborate his theory and to fill the gaps in it, to fill the trunk and twigs of
the tree. But it seems to me that the theoretical framework has very little
impact on the actual progress of the work in biological research. In a way some
aspects of Darwinism and of neo-Darwinism seem to me to have held back the
progress of science."—*Colin Patterson, The Listener (Senior
paleontologist, British Museum of Natural History, London).
Evolution
is based on faith alone, for there is no fact to accompany it.
"‘What
is it [evolution] based upon? Upon nothing whatever but faith, upon belief in
the reality of the unseen—belief in the fossils that cannot be produced, belief
in the embryological experiments that refuse to come off. It is faith
unjustified by works."—*Arthur N. Field.
"Acceptance
of evolution is still based on a great deal of faith."—L.W. Klotz,
Lutheran Witness Reporter, November 14, 1965 [college science teacher].
It
has become the great religion of science.
"In
fact, evolution became in a sense a scientific religion; almost all scientists
have accepted it and many are prepared to ‘bend’ their observations to fit in
with it."—*H. Lipson, "A Physicist Looks at Evolution,"
Physics Bulletin 31 (1980), p. 138.
It
gives to mankind the most incredible of deities: random chance.
"The
irony is devastating. The main purpose of Darwinism was to drive every last
trace of an incredible God from biology. But the theory replaces God with an
even more incredible deity omnipotent chance."—*T. Rosazak, Unfinished
Animal (1975), pp. 101-102.
It
is a creed dispensed by the intellectuals to the great masses of mankind.
"Darwinism
is a creed not only with scientists committed to document the all-purpose role
of natural selection. It is a creed with masses of people who have at best a
vague notion of the mechanism of evolution as proposed by Darwin, let alone as
further complicated by his successors."—*S. Jaki, Cosmos and Creator
(1982).
It
is an entrenched dogma that substitutes for religion.
"[Karl]
Popper warns of a danger: ‘A theory, even a scientific theory, may become an
intellectual fashion, a substitute for religion, an entrenched dogma.’ This has
certainly been true of evolutionary theory."—*Colin Patterson,
Evolution (1977), p. 150.
It
is the underlying mythology in the great temple of modern atheism.
"Evolution
is sometimes the key mythological element in a philosophy that functions as a
virtual religion."—*E. Harrison, "Origin and Evolution of the
Universe," Encyclopaedia Britannica: Macropaedia (1974), p. 1007.
*Lessl
says that *Sagan’s boastful declarations, about evolutionary theory,
actually changes matter and energy into a god with moral qualities.
"By
calling evolution fact, the process of evolution is removed from dispute; it is
no longer merely a scientific construct, but now stands apart from humankind
and its perceptual frailties. Sagan apparently wishes to accomplish what Peter
Borger calls ‘objectification,’ the attribution of objective reality to a
humanly produced concept . . With evolution no longer regarded as a mere human
construct, but now as a part of the natural order of the cosmos, evolution
becomes a sacred archetype against which human actions can be weighed.
Evolution is a sacred object or process in that it becomes endowed with
mysterious and awesome power."—*T. Lessl, "Science and the Sacred
Cosmos: The Ideological Rhetoric of Carl Sagan," Quarterly Journal of
Speech, 71:178 (1985).
The
American Humanist Association, founded in 1933, is the 20th-century equivalent
of the 19th century American Atheist Association and is one of the leading
evolutionists’ bastions in the United States. A decade later it became a
non-profit organization. Notice that they themselves consider it a
"religion":
"Humanism
is the belief that man shapes his own destiny. It is a constructive philosophy,
a non-theistic religion, a way of life . . The American Humanist Association is
a non-profit, tax-exempt organization, incorporated in the early 1940’s in
Illinois for educational and religious purposes . . Humanist counselors [can be
called upon] to solemnize weddings and conduct memorial services and to assist
in individual value counseling."—*American Humanist Association
promotional literature
EVOLUTION COULD NOT DO THIS
The
Mexican fly, Ululodes, lays a batch of eggs in clumps on the underside
of a twig, then moves farther down the twig and lays a another clump. But the
second batch has no eggs in it. It is a brown fluid with smaller club-shaped
kernels. This fluid neither hardens nor evaporates, but remains liquid for the
three or four weeks till the eggs farther up the twig hatch. Along comes an
ant, searching for food, and runs into the brown liquid. Touching it, the ant
jumps back, cleans itself frantically, and quickly leaves. The eggs are safe.
CHAPTER 23 - STUDY AND REVIEW QUESTIONS
SCIENTISTS SPEAK
GRADES 5 TO 12 ON A GRADUATED SCALE
1 -
In section 1 (Evolutionists Explain Their Objectives), evolutionists
explain their purposes in devising these strange theories. List some of them.
2 -
The evolutionists have had over a hundred years to come up with outstanding
scientific evidence supporting their theory. But, instead, in section 2 (Best
Evidences of Evolution), they list a strange set of "best
evidences." What are they? Why do not the evolutionists, instead, present
scientific facts in support of their theory?
3 -
Section 3 (Scientists Speak against Evolution) discusses several urgent
reasons why people must be warned against evolutionary teaching. Discuss some
of them.
4 -
In section 4 (Scientists Declare Evolution to be an Unworkable and Useless),
conscientious scientists have something to say about the foolishness and
underlying fallacies of the theory. Write out two of the statements that you
think summarizes the situation well. Which writer said it best? Why?
5 -
In section 5 (Scientists Maintain that Evolution Hinders Science),
scientists speak about the great damage an adherence to the theory has done to
scientific progress in the 20th century. Thoughtfully explain three ways it has
hindered the acquirement of learning by scientists.
6 -
Charles Darwin is the man who got the full-blown theory started over a century
ago. Scientists have words to say about him also. Discuss four problems that
they find with Darwin and/or his writings (Section 6, Scientists Speak about
Darwin and His Book).
7 -
It is of highest significance that there are only two alternatives: One must
either choose evolutionary theory or the facts about Creation and the Flood. In
section 7 (Only Two Alternatives), recognized scientists acknowledge
this. Which writer says it the best? Why?
8 -
A key issue is the fact that evolutionary theory is itself a religion! In
section 8 (Evolution Is a Religious Faith) are statements establishing
the fact. Write out two quotations that say it well.
CONTINUE: Chapter 24 Utterly Impossible
.
 | ||||
