Why do people believe this about Darwin? Let me clear this up!?

Question

This is what someone said to me in a recent post. "Remember, Evolution is a theory that Darwin confessed that he made up on his death bed, and the bible is the INSPIRED word of god". I have also seen many Christians and others say that Darwin renounced evolution on his death bed and accepted Christ as his savior.

Well let me clear this up!

Darwin did no such thing before he died. This is merely religious propaganda from people who can't take on evolution with facts so they resort to attacking one of it's founders. Darwins wife and daughter both after his death confirmed that Darwin stuck to his beliefs on science and evolution. Below is a list of websites with articles recounting the truth. Too bad Christians and other opponents to evolution are too lazy to take the time to do their own research.

www.talkorigins.org/indexcc/CG/CG001.html

www.stephenjaygould.org/ctrl/ladyhope.html

www.apologeticspress.org/articles/2193

www.answersingenesis.org/docs/1315.as

http://www.answersingenesis.org/creation/v18/i1/darwin_recant.asp

http://www.skepticfiles.org/evolut/recantmt.htm

http://www.apologeticspress.org/articles/2193

http://www.talkorigins.org/indexcc/CG/CG001.html

Sorry, these links should work now.

Big Dawg, no I wasn't there when he died nor was I there at the beginning. But that is irrelavant, because someone was there when he died, and we do have proof as to what happened at the beginning.

Answer 1

You should check out the post earlier about how evolution is bull. A lot of ridiculous people post insane things such as "there is not one scientific fact proving that evolution exists"

***EDIT***

to the people below who commented that "we weren't there so how would we know." you all believe a book. A BOOK. that could easily be complete fiction. we rely on scientific FACT that has been proved over and over again in the past hundreds of years. Can you PROVE adam and eve existed? No. can you PROVE there was a lovely little perfect garden where people ran around naked? No. Bring some solid fact, and maybe people will listen.

Answer 2

Mr. Tooooo Ugly:

Many people learned in elementary school that a theory falls in the middle of a hierarchy of certainty— above a mere hypothesis but below a law. Scientists do not use the terms that way, however. According to the National Academy of Sciences (NAS), a scientific theory is “a well-substantiated explanation of some aspect of the natural world that can incorporate facts, laws, inferences, and tested hypotheses.” No amount of validation changes a theory into a law, which is a descriptive generalization about nature. So when scientists talk about the theory of evolution—or the atomic theory or the theory of relativity, for that matter—they are not expressing reservations about its truth. In addition to the theory of evolution, meaning the idea of descent with modification, one may also speak of the fact of evolution. The NAS defines a fact as “an observation that has been repeatedly confirmed and for all practical purposes is accepted as ‘true.’” The fossil record and abundant other evidence testify that organisms have evolved through time. Although no one observed those transformations, the indirect evidence is clear, unambiguous and compelling. All sciences frequently rely on indirect evidence. Physicists cannot see subatomic particles directly, for instance, so they verify their existence by watching for telltale tracks that the particles leave in cloud chambers. The absence of direct observation does not make physicists’ conclusions less certain.

Answer 3

You're right. He didn't have a death bed confession. Instead, in his book, The Descent of Man, he resorted to a form of Lamarckism, which was proven false many years prior.
What puzzles me, more than anything else, is the absolute reluctance of Darwinists to hold onto his THEORY of Evolution. Scientists simply assume that evolution is backed up by other fields and so they do not see the fiction. Evolution relies on the possibility of the creation of life from nonliving matter, or Spontaneous Generation. However, this defies PROVEN Cell Theory, which states that cells can only come from existing cells. In order for evolution to be plausible, some of the most basic of all scientific laws must not. Therefore, evolution cannot be factual.

Answer 4

First, apes & human beings have a effortless ancestor & 2d, genetic technologies has shown the "theory of evolution" to be truth. DNA is an advanced code that we are slowly interpreting. imagine of a stunning room crammed with switches, some that produce a effect at the same time as grew to change into on, others that do now no longer something, and some enable or disable distinct switches... now start up flipping those switches to make your recommendations up what they do. that's DNA & RNA. Now assume you've the negative little insects crawling everywhere that are continuously rewiring those switches (the virus) and putting their own switches acceptable the following & there (so as that they can make their own little insects.) that's evolution & the virus is to blame for a minimum of three% of human DNA. contained in the subsequent 2 many years we are able to manage to "reengineer" maximum of the global's species by in straightforward words utilizing the precise suited virus to restructure the genes of stated species. confident, each and all the global's species are evolving on the instantaneous... even with if till ultimately the human lifetime is prolonged by 1000's of 1000's of years, it fairly is in straightforward words now no longer really visable. Edit: i'm wondering how lengthy it is going to be before someone, someplace, makes a call to chop back human Chromosome #2 or fuse the Chimps chromosomes to target to furnish a hybrid of both species? Our Chromosome #2 is so on the point of to a fusion of two chimp Chromosomes that it fairly is glaring we've a effortless ancestor.

Answer 5

Mr.Whoever u r,if u r so sure of Darwins theory of evolution,then cud u plz answer my question, Why d hell did some living organismz sprout feathers,while others developed limbs and yet others decided to go 4 fins and gills. This is of course afer the fact that none of these animals had a brain of their own.And y o y on earth didnt the most intelligent creature on earth not keep all of dem since he knew land wz never gonna be enuff 4 d growing population. Plz answer asap.Question open to all.

Answer 6

Really, evolution - survival of the fittest as we know it is really the work of Herbert Spencer.

"Christians" make up all sorts of lies to justify certain religious beliefs in an increasingly scientific world.

Many other lies too to support Anti-Semitism - like the protocols of Zion.

Answer 7

Thanks for clearing this up since it's a pet peeve of mine. BTW, fix your links...they have to have http:// in front of them to show up in YA.

It may be good to note (and I could be wrong on this since I don't really care what religion Darwin was) Darwin may or may not have been an atheist...from my understanding he just quit going to church later in life but never claimed atheism.

Answer 8

just a myth to make creationists feel better because they know his theories are credible enough to threaten their own beliefs

although.... darwin was not always correct. for example he thought evolution proved the inferiority of women

Answer 9

Religious people are like politicians , they lie when it suits them.
That's why Bush is so successful , he combines religion and politics in his crusade against the Middle East.

Answer 10

If you were that concerned about the truth you would have come to realize what nonsense the "THEORY" of evolution is.