WASHINGTON, April 8, 2013 - Many who believe in the Darwinian Evolutionary theory take it to be a proven fact. Not only that, but they also view those with another perspective (i.e.: not believing in Darwinian Evolution) with contempt and disdain.
“It is absolutely safe to say that if you meet someone who claims not to believe in evolution, that person is ignorant, stupid or insane.” (Dr. Richard Dawkins, 1999, NY Times article: “Put Your Money on Evolution”)
So, what kind of theories and/or evidence do evolutionists postulate that are so logical and intelligent that anyone who does not believe it (as Dr. Dawkins stated) is ignorant, stupid or insane? Consider the following example of what is being taught by sympathizers of the Darwinian Evolutionary theory:
“The observable universe could have evolved from an infinitesimal region (i.e.: smaller than the period at the end of this sentence). It is then tempting to go one step further and speculate that the entire universe evolved from literally nothing.” (Dr. Alan Guth, Scientific American, May 1984, pg. 128)
Unfortunately, many persons put their faith in a theory that is largely based on interpreted facts; not actual facts. Those who attempt to shed light on the fallacies of the Darwinian Evolution theory are ridiculed, scorned, vilified, attacked, or excluded from so-called intellectual circles of academia.
Ben Stein produced a movie: “Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed” in which he makes the case that the Darwinian Evolutionary theory is the only model that can be (i.e.: allowed to be) used in institutions of higher learning to explain how life on earth began. He further maintained that many courageous educators have paid a tremendous price of EXPULSION from academia because they dared to challenge the notion of classical Darwinian theory of evolution (i.e.: life on earth evolved from a non-living source). Here is a trailer from Stein’s movie:
Why are the centers of academia dogmatically supporting the Darwinian Evolution theory while (at the same time) doggedly suppressing any contrary view? The answer is not easy to determine because there are some who genuinely believe in the Darwinian Evolution theory, but have not gone beyond a cursory examination of it. Some believe in the Darwinian Evolution theory because they consider the alternative (creation/intelligent design) to be unthinkable or unacceptable under any circumstances. Regardless of their motivation, proponents adhere to the Darwinian Evolutionary theory, despite voluminous evidence that has not only debunked it, but has established it as one of the major frauds perpetrated on the unsuspecting. Grab your seat belt; turbulence lies ahead:
“The evolutionary trees that adorn our textbooks have data only at the tips and nodes of their branches; the rest is inference, however reasonable, not the evidence of fossils.” (Prof. Stephen Jay Gould, Harvard University: From “Evolution’s Erratic Pace” – Natural History, Volume 5)
Modern contemporary teachings on the Darwinian Evolution theory have placed heavy emphasis on the supposed evolution of the modern horse.
The following are quotes from proponents of evolution:
“Many examples commonly cited, such as the evolution of the horse family or of sabertooth tigers can be readily shown to have been falsified and not to be really othogenic.” (G. G. Simpson, “Evolutionary Determinism and the Fossil Record”, Scientific Monthly, Vol. 71, Oct. 1950, pg 264
“Other examples, including the much-repeated ‘gradual’ evolution of the modern horse, have not held up under close examination.” (Biology: The Unity and Diversity of Life, Wadsworth, 1992, pg. 304)
The geologic column and the fossil record are a tag-team duo providing circular reasoning. On the one hand, paleontologists date fossils based on the strata (of the geologic column) in which it was found. On the other hand, geologists date fossils based on the types of fossils found within the strata.
“The rocks do date the fossils, but the fossils date the rocks more accurately. Stratigraphy cannot avoid this kind of reasoning… because circularity is inherent in the derivation of time scales.” (J.E. O’Rourke, “Pragmatism vs. Materialism in Stratigraphy,” American Journal of science, January 1976)
Another method is radiometric dating and measuring the half-life of radioactive isotopes (Carbon 14-changing-to-Nitrogen, Rubidium 87-changing-to-Strontium, Uranium 238-changing-to-Lead, Potassium 40-changing-to-Argon, etc.) based on the composition of the material examined. Many assumptions have to be made when using radiometric dating, and results can vary wildly. The most infamous faux pax of radiometric dating was the case of the KBS Tuff (named after the archaeological site discovered: Kay Behrensmeyer Site.
From the article: “The question arises, How does one know when one has good samples for dating? The answer is that ‘good’ samples give dates in accord with evolutionary presuppositions. ‘Bad’ samples give dates not in conformity with evolution — a classic illustration of circular reasoning.”
If you take a critical look at the evidence, you will find that you may have been duped in school. “Ontogeny recapitulates Phylogeny” sounds learned and deeply intelligent. However, that statement (theorized by Ernst Haeckel) is a lie that has been clearly disproven. Yet, the bogus illustrations (depicting animal embryos strikingly similar to a human embryo) are still in many textbooks in our grade schools, high schools and universities …to this day. How many realize that Haeckel’s lie was exposed many years ago, and that he was put on trial by his peers and found guilty? Not many, I suspect.
Archaeopteryx (which was a bird in every anatomical sense) is still being taught today (in some textbooks) as an evolutionary transitional form. But how many of you have ever read the following:
“Paleontologists have tried to turn Archaeopteryx into an earthbound feathered dinosaur, but it is not. It is a bird, a perching bird. And no amount of paleobabble is going to change that.” (Dr. Alan Feducia, Univ. of N. Carolina Chapel Hill, from “Archaeopteryx: Early Bird Catches a Can of Worms.” (Science Magazine, Feb 5, 1994, pgs. 764, 765)
A Paleontologist at a British archaeological museum was asked why his book failed to show true transitional fossils (i.e.: intermediate types between separate and distinct life forms). His answer was embarrassing to proponents of the Darwinian Evolution theory:
“I fully agree with your comments on the lack of evolutionary transitions in my book. If I knew of any, fossil or living, I would certainly (have) included them. I will lay it on the line – there is not one such fossil.” (Dr. Colin Patterson, Senior Paleontologist, British Museum of Natural History in correspondence to Luther Sunderland (quoted in: “Darwin’s Enigma,” Luther Sunderland, 1988, pg. 89).
One dark side to the Darwinian Evolutionary theory is the fact that Charles Darwin believed that there were (and are) inferior races of people. Adolf Hitler took the Darwinian Evolution theory and concluded that certain races were superior to others. He believed that Asians, Blacks and Jews were on the lower end of the evolutionary chain (with some races referred to as “near ape” or “pure ape”). Such an evolution-based mindset has led to human atrocities and genocide throughout the ages, including modern day eugenics. A careful examination of the full title of Darwin’s book reveals this prejudice of implicit racial superiority:
“On the Origin of the Species by Means of Natural Selection, or the Preservation of Favoured Races in the Struggle for Life”
Evidence that there was a strong correlation between the Holocaust and the Darwinian Evolution theory is cited here.
I encourage everyone to insist on facts and empirical information; challenge interpreted facts. Keep your mind open to other possibilities, and follow the road to wherever the true facts lead. If you want to stir things up, ask your teacher/professor about some of the things cited in this article. Be sure to note whether or not they answer your question, or become defensive and irked by your query.
As Ben Stein chronicled in his movie, you may pay dearly for challenging the status quo. You may want to purchase the movie online, or order/rent it via your on-demand video subscription. I challenge you to go on a truth-seeking quest, and do your own independent research. Document and cross reference as applicable. In the end, you are the one ultimately responsible for what you believe and act upon.
This article is the copyrighted property of the writer and Communities @ WashingtonTimes.com. Written permission must be obtained before reprint in online or print media. REPRINTING TWTC CONTENT WITHOUT PERMISSION AND/OR PAYMENT IS THEFT AND PUNISHABLE BY LAW.