Monday, March 08, 2004

Evolutionists on Evolution

The source of most of the material on this page will be W.R. Bird's excellent book, The Origin of Species Revisited. Although many Christians have managed to fit belief in the correctness of the theory of evolution into their theistic view, this mental contortion is not only unnecessary, it serves neither the interests of scientific investigation nor of any search for truth, as can be seen from these quotes.

There are many more quotes available, but I have chosen a representative few. This page is still under construction, so some quotes are still unattributed.

"It is therefore of immediate concern to both biologist and layman that Darwinism is under attack.The theory ... that undermined 19th-century religion has virtually become a religion itself and in its turn is being threatened by fresh ideas. The attacks are certainly not limited to those of the creationists and religious fundamentalists who deny Darwinism for political and moral reasons. The main thrust of the criticism comes from within science itself. ...

"What is even more surprising is that these doubts are arising simultaneously from several independent branches of science. With a growth in the appreciation of the philosophy of science ... has come a doubt about whether Darwinism is, strictly speaking, scientific. ... From within biology, the doubts have come from scientists in half a dozen separate fields. ..."

- B. Leith, The Descent of Darwin: A Handbook of Doubts about Darwinism 10-11, 1982

General Complaints    
"The overriding supremacy of the myth has created a widespread illusion that the theory of evolution was all but proved 100 years ago and that all subsequent biological research -- paleontological, zoological and ... genetics and molecular biology -- has provided ever-increasing evidence for Darwinian ideas. Nothing could be further from the truth...." [Denton]142  
"The theories of evolution, with which our studious youth have been deceived, constitute actually a dogma that all the world continues to teach: but each, in his specialty, the zoologist or botanist, ascertains that none of the explanations furnished is adequate.... [I]t results from this summary, that the theory of evolution, is impossible." [Lemoine, pres. of Geolog. Soc. of France, director of Nat. Hist. Mus. in Paris, ed. of Encycl. Francaise]151  
"The extreme rarity of transitional forms in the fossil record persists as the trade secret of paleontology. 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."[]58    
"I fully agree with your comments on the lack of direct illustration 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 for which one could make a watertight argument. ... Is Archaeopteryx the ancestor of all birds? Perhaps yes, perhaps no: there is no way of answering the question. It is easy enough to make up stories of how one form gave rise to another ... But such stories are not part of science, for there is no way of putting them to the test." [Patterson]59  
"Evolution requires intermediate forms between species and paleontology does not provide them." [Kitts]59  
"It is, indeed, a very curious state of affairs, I think, that paleontologists have been insisting that their record is consistent with slow, steady, gradual evolution where I think that privately, they've known for over a hundred years that such is not the case. ..." [Eldredge, advocating PE]147  
"... the paleontological record supports no such interpretation. There has been no steady progress in the higher development of organic design. We have had, instead, vast stretches of little or no change and one evolutionary burst that created the entire system." [1]    
"In spite of these examples ... most new species, genera, and families and ... nearly all new categories above the level of families appear in the record suddenly and are not led up to by known, gradual, completely continuous transitional sequences." [2]47    
"Well, we are now about 120 years after Darwin and the knowledge of the fossil records has been greatly expanded. ... [I]ronically, we have even fewer examples of evolutionary transition than we had in Darwin's time ..." [3]48    
"As is now well known, most fossil species appear instantaneously in the record, persist for some millions of years virtually unchanged, only to disappear abruptly ..." [4]51    
"And it is not always clear, in fact it's rarely clear, that the descendants were actually better adapted than their predecessors. In other words, biological improvement is hard to find ..." [5]51    
"Most orders, classes, and phyla appear abruptly and commonly have already acquired all the characters that distinguish them."[6]52    
"This 'explosion' of advanced life forms, an event that apparently occurred within a period of only[!] ten or twenty million years, has puzzled paleontologists for more than a century."[7]53    
"It is true that some phases of the record show, especially along certain lines, successions of forms so closely knit as to make it hard to resist the conclusion that they do indeed represent [some evolutionary series], but it is also true, and in a much more real way, that the record not only has gaps in many places, but that these are often just where the absences of reliable positive information is most frustrating and disturbing."[Good]60    
"It must be significant that nearly all the evolutionary stories I learned as a student ... have now been 'debunked'. Similarly, my own experience of more than twenty years looking for evolutionary lineages among the Mesozoic Brachiopoda has proved them equally elusive." [Ager, Imperial College, paleontologist]61  
"Whatever ideas authorities may have on the subject, the lungfishes, like every other major group of fishes that I know, have their origins firmly based in nothing." [White, former president of Linnean Society]61  
"[The] transition between the Paleozoic amphibians and the 'modernized' forms is almost completely a blank."[Romer]62    
"Under construction    
"Other explosions, such as Cambrian trilobites or Tertiary mammals, are much more obvious. The latter are particularly interesting because they lay doggo for well over 100 million years before putting in their successful takeover bid. ..."[8]55    
"Modern gorillas, orangutans, and chimpanzees spring out of nowhere, as it were. They are here today; they have no yesterday."[9]55    
"In spite of recent findings, the time and place of origin of order Primates remains shrouded in mystery."[Simons]63    
"[The] transition from insectivore to primate is not documented by fossils."[Kelso]63    
"... no scientist could logically dispute the proposition that man, without having been involved in any act of divine creation, evolved from some ape-like creature in a very short space of time -- speaking in geological terms -- without leaving any fossil traces of the steps of the transformation."[Zuckerman]63    
"Unfortunately, the fossil record for hominids ... and pongids is almost totally blank between four and eight million years ago -- an irresistible tabula rasa on which to inscribe belief, preconception, and personal opinion."[Zihlman & Lowenstein]63    
Information Content    
"[T]he eye to this day gives me a cold shudder"[Darwin]73    
"I remember well the time when the thought of the eye made me cold all over, but I have got over this stage of the complaint, and now small trifling particulars of structure often make me very uncomfortable. The sight of a feather in a peacock's tail, whenever I gaze at it, makes me sick."[Darwin]75    
"How then are we to account for the evolution of such a complicated organ as the eye? ... If even the slightest thing is wrong -- if the retina is missing, or the lens opaque, or the dimensions in error -- the eye ... is consequently useless. Since it must be either perfect, or perfectly useless, how could it have evolved by small, successive, Darwinian steps?" [Hardin]73  
"The curious thing, however, is that in their distribution the eyes of the invertebrates form no series of contiguity and succession. Without obvious phylogenic sequence, their occurrence seems haphazard ..." [Duke-Elder, "in his classic 15-volume work on opthamology"]74  
Evolution as Anti-Science    
"Evolution is a fairy tale for grown-ups. The theory has helped nothing in the progress of science. It is useless." - Dr. Louise Bounoure, Dir. of Research at the National Center of Scientific Research, France. Cited in The Facts on Creation vs. Evolution, Ankerberg & Weldon, 25 (1993) [Ank26]  
The "dead hand of Darwinism" has "weighed heavily on [scientific] progress for over one hundred years." - Dr. A.E. Wilder-Smith, The Creation of Life: A Cybernetic Approach to Evolution (1970), 244-45. As cited by Ankerberg.[Ank25]  
"This situation, where scientific men rally to the defense of a doctrine they are unable to define scientifically, much less demonstrate with scientific rigour, attempting to maintain its credit with the public by the supression of criticism and the elimination of difficulties, is abnormal and undesirable in science." - Dr. W.R. Thompson, "noted entomologist, in his introduction to the centenary edition of Darwin's Origin of Species, [observing] that Darwinism has had a wasteful influence in numerous scientific disciplines including genetics, biology, classification, and embryology." As cited by Ankerberg.[Ank25]  
"The final results of all my investigation and study, namely that the idea of evolution, tested by experiments in speciation and allied sciences, always leads to incredible contradictions and confusing conseqeuences, on account of which the evolution theory ought to be entirely abandoned, will no doubt enrage many; and even more so my conclusion that the evolution theory can by no means be regarded as an innocuous natural philosophy, but that it 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 speculative theory." - Dr. Heribert Lars-Nilsson, "after 40 years of scientific research" attempting to validate evolutionary theory, Synthetische Artbildung Lund Sweden (1953), 11. As cited by Ankerberg.  

Some Publications by Noncreationist Scientists Dissatisfied with Evolutionism

(W.R. Bird, The Origin of Species Revisited, 4 (1991), Thomas Nelson Inc.)

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?