1. Time and again graduates of government/liberal education institutions have reacted aggressively to any criticism of Dawin's theory of evolution. As has been pointed out, this is because said institutions favor Marxist anti-capitalist, anti-religion worldviews, and Darwin's thesis serves as bedrock support for this view.
a. One of the first readers of 'On the Origin of Species' was Friedrich Engels, then living in Manchester. He wroteto Karl Marx: "Darwin, by the way, whom I’m reading just now, is absolutely splendid. There was one aspect of teleology that had yet to be demolished,and that has now been done. Never before has so grandiose an attempt been made to demonstrate historical evolution in Nature, and certainly never to such good effect."
Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels, "Marx-Engels Collected Works" , vol. 40, p. 441.
2. " Because the claims of Darwinism are presented to the public as "science"most people are under the impression that they are supported by direct evidence such as experiments and fossil record studies This impression is seriously misleading[: it is false.]
Scientists cannot observe complex biological structures being created by random mutations and selection in a laboratory or elsewhere."
Johnson P.E. "Evolution as Dogma: The Establishment of Naturalism," Foundation for Thought and Ethics: Richardson, Texas, 1990, pp1-17
Let that sink in.....then re-consider your belief in Darwin's thesis.
3. To defend Darwin, said acolytes often claim that it is the only 'scientific' theory of evolution, or that it is accepted by all scientists.
Hardly.
There are many theories meant to explain all life on earth. Darwin's is called a 'bottom-up' theory, based on two ideas, the twin pillars of his theory:
a. universal common ancestry of all living things, all had a single common ancestor way back in the distant past..."all the organic beings that have ever lived on this earth have descended from some one primordial form" (Darwin, "On The Origin of Species," p.484.)
and
b. natural selection, the process that acted on random variations of the traits or features of organism and their offspring.
Not only does the fossil record not support this view, but the discovery of the Burgess Shale, with all sorts of suddenly-appearing species, ended support of Darwin by cognoscenti.
Once more?
Evidence inveighs strongly against such a Darwinian view.
So....why Darwin?
a. One of the first readers of 'On the Origin of Species' was Friedrich Engels, then living in Manchester. He wroteto Karl Marx: "Darwin, by the way, whom I’m reading just now, is absolutely splendid. There was one aspect of teleology that had yet to be demolished,and that has now been done. Never before has so grandiose an attempt been made to demonstrate historical evolution in Nature, and certainly never to such good effect."
Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels, "Marx-Engels Collected Works" , vol. 40, p. 441.
2. " Because the claims of Darwinism are presented to the public as "science"most people are under the impression that they are supported by direct evidence such as experiments and fossil record studies This impression is seriously misleading[: it is false.]
Scientists cannot observe complex biological structures being created by random mutations and selection in a laboratory or elsewhere."
Johnson P.E. "Evolution as Dogma: The Establishment of Naturalism," Foundation for Thought and Ethics: Richardson, Texas, 1990, pp1-17
Let that sink in.....then re-consider your belief in Darwin's thesis.
3. To defend Darwin, said acolytes often claim that it is the only 'scientific' theory of evolution, or that it is accepted by all scientists.
Hardly.
There are many theories meant to explain all life on earth. Darwin's is called a 'bottom-up' theory, based on two ideas, the twin pillars of his theory:
a. universal common ancestry of all living things, all had a single common ancestor way back in the distant past..."all the organic beings that have ever lived on this earth have descended from some one primordial form" (Darwin, "On The Origin of Species," p.484.)
and
b. natural selection, the process that acted on random variations of the traits or features of organism and their offspring.
Not only does the fossil record not support this view, but the discovery of the Burgess Shale, with all sorts of suddenly-appearing species, ended support of Darwin by cognoscenti.
Once more?
Evidence inveighs strongly against such a Darwinian view.
So....why Darwin?
