Some learned scientists doubt Evolution, so why insist it be taught as absolute fact?

Question

There are microbiologists and paleontologists who disagree with the Theory of Evolution. So why is it that some people get so upset if everybody doesn't declare their complete faith in it?

The concept of a Being transcending both time and space is not at all irrational. In fact, it is the only way to explain the existence of time and space, since, as we know, neither of them are eternal. Why are intelligent, scientifically minded people then so vehemently opposed to children being taught that God created the universe and humanity?

Answer 1

Evolution isn't something to "have faith" in, any more than gravity is. The evolutionary process is a very *obvious* scientific FACT, and the evidence and proof of it is so abundant in rock strata worldwide, that everyone on earth could spend the next thousand years studying it, and still not unearth all of it. There's nothing theoretical about it.

Most **intelligent** Christians have no trouble realizing that a God who is intelligent, omniscient, and omnipotent enough to have created the universe would have had NO problem creating the very obvious evolutionary process. Thus, we have no desire to regard OUR God to be One who has **limitations**.

Too bad about yours.

Answer 2

Swedish biologist Soren Lovtrup made an interesting statement: “I suppose that nobody will deny that it is a great misfortune if an entire branch of science becomes addicted to a false theory. But this is what has happened in biology...I believe that one day the Darwinian myth will be ranked the greatest deceit in the history of science. When this happens, many people will pose the question: How did this ever happen?”

Many people’s standard of authority is Majority Decision. This is the “Everyone else is doing it” argument. Teenagers love to use it—but sadly, many adults do as well. You know, you moistened your finger to see which way the wind is blowing, and that is what you follow.

But is this a good standard of authority—is truth found in the majority? The majority of people used to believe that the world was flat; did that make it flat? The majority of doctors used to think they didn’t need to wash their hands before an operation; did that save the patients they were infecting? And so forth.

So much of it is academic peer pressure; it’s not wanting to be different from the world. We are so indoctrinated in molecules-to-man evolution, and many people are intimidated by the secular scientists. But secular scientists are fallible human beings with limited knowledge and limited understanding, and like every human, they hate to be criticized and are subject to bias and preconceived ideas. And they don’t want to lose their grant money.

Neo-Darwinian evolution is a belief system about the past based on the words of men who don’t know everything and who were not there. And history shows that the scientific establishment has been wrong time after time; that is why the science textbooks constantly have to be revised.

As T. Wallace has said, “A major reason why evolutionist arguments can sound so persuasive is because they often combine assertive dogma with intimidating, dismissive ridicule towards anyone who dares to disagree with them. Evolutionists wrongly believe that their views are validated by persuasive presentations invoking scientific terminology and allusions to a presumed monopoly of scientific knowledge and understanding on their part. But they haven’t come close to demonstrating evolutionism to be more than an ever-changing theory with a highly questionable and unscientific basis. (The situation isn’t helped by poor science education generally. Even advanced college biology students often understand little more than the dogma of evolutionary theory, and few have the time [or the guts] to question its scientific validity.)”

Oh, and for those who put so much stock in Peer-Review: http://www.discovery.org/scripts/viewDB/index.php?command=view&id=2640&program=CSC%20-%20Scientific%20Research%20and%20Scholarship%20-%20Science

Answer 3

Have these microbiologists and paleontologists had their research peer-reviewed? If not, their findings or opinions are merely personal opinions.

"I have encountered a few 'creationists' and because they were usually nice, intelligent people, I have been unable to decide whether they were really mad or only pretending to be mad. If I was a religious person, I would consider creationism nothing less than blasphemy. Do its adherents imagine that God is a cosmic hoaxer who has created the whole vast fossil record for the sole purpose of misleading humankind ?" — Arthur C. Clarke.

"Geology shows that fossils are of different ages. Paleontology shows a fossil sequence, the list of species represented changes through time. Taxonomy shows biological relationships among species. Evolution is the explanation that threads it all together. Creationism is the practice of squeezing one's eyes shut and wailing: 'does not!'" — Dr. Pepper.

"Several thousand years ago, a small tribe of ignorant near-savages wrote various collections of myths, wild tales, lies, and gibberish. Over the centuries, these stories were embroidered, garbled, mutilated, and torn into small pieces that were then repeatedly shuffled. Finally, this material was badly translated into several languages successively. The resultant text, creationists feel, is the best guide to this complex and technical subject."

"If the guy's religion is dependent on evolution being false, then it is a stupid religion and should be made fun of until he shuts up in public about his delusions or gets a religion that isn't so easily proven false." — Darby.

Answer 4

Just a little to add to some of the answers.

The theory of evolution is just that, a theory. To be fanatically evolutionist takes a lot of faith, because evolution will never be proved, it would take millions of years. However natural selection, and environmental adaptation of various species and sub-species is fact. We see this in how species vary as we travel around the world. Also we see how so many domestic species from dogs, cats, and livestock have changed through animal husbandry, and selective breeding.
No denying it; species change.

Evolutionists always state the fossil record as proof.

An omnipotent God could certainly create the earth with the appearance of age. If you read the book of Genesis, up until the time of the fall man lived in total harmony with nature. After Adam and Eve's fall from grace the Bible tells us that all of creation turned against them. In order for mankind to survive God may have eradicated all of the animals that would have wiped out mankind. The large herbivores because they would have stripped the earth, and the large carnivores because they would have eaten all the species, including themselves. This eradication would have resulted in the fossil record.

Like evolution this Divine eradication is just a theory also, but just as plausible as evolution.

On the lighter side...,

How many evolutionists does it take to change a light bulb?
None. Just leave it a few million years and it will change on its own.

Mark

Answer 5

1. Name them (aside from Michael Behe).

2. No scientific theory is absolute truth. That's the business of philosophy. And no, science doesn't require faith, it's in the business of working with observable data, not transcendent beings.

3. Creationism and religion does not belong in a science class. Evolution does. For a religious perspective on the origin of the universe, go to your local center of worship and enroll your kids there.

4. We vigorously support the teaching of science in schools, because science is an important part of our modern world.

.

Answer 6

You will find one or two nutters in any discipline, There are almost no real microbiologists and paleontologists who have any disagreement at all with the theory of evolution.

To be very clear again... in ANY discipline there will be controversy at the margin, that is how science works, but there is less disagreement concerning evolution then in almost any area in science... get that THAN ALMOST ANY AREA IN SCIENCE. If you teach science at all evolution is one of those areas in which it is possible to teach it in a clear and precise way BECAUSE THERE IS NO REAL CONTROVERSY!

And your second paragraph is equally wrong.

Answer 7

Dear Mr. Creationist (or whatever your handlers tell you to call it this week),

Another 30 board-feet of pasting the same arguments does not change the fact that they are still as wrong as when we debunked them all the first time.

You have absolutely zero ability to comprehend what you paste, and as such, when you come across the same argument already shredded here at a later date it appears brand new to you. It is a truly sad state, and you need to grasp that you only highlight your own mental deficiency by persisting with the cut and paste marathon.

Were you able, on even the simplest level, to grasp the concepts involved, you would recognize the repetitive nature of your posts. As it is, you do not even have that elementary comprehension of the topic at hand.

Sadly, this is how creationism works, they rely on the vehement and vociferous response of their most ignorant and uneducated of followers to speak for them. They pot up the article, fully knowing the lies, distortions, and misleading nature of them and wait for people like you to cry them from the mountaintops.

We know the creationist movement to be dishonest to it's core, because the articles they produce requires a pretty decent knowledge of astronomy, cosmology, geology, anthropology, and a variety of other sciences... yet it is deliberately twisted and distorted in to outright lies. And this is not the type of misunderstanding that comes from a bad grasp of the topic, it required in-depth lies and trickery to produce.

So climb that mountain again, Rainman, and tell us again how wrong we are.

Answer 8

It's not the "Theory" of Evolution, it's just "Evolution". It's "Darwin's theory of evolution by Natural Selection" that a tiny few scientists aren't completely convinced of. And it really is only a TINY percentage of them , and they all just HAPPEN to live in America. In Europe a scientist doubting Darwins Theory of Evolution would be seen as rather the oddity.

Answer 9

No proof of a supernatural intervention. Creation of the universe is not addressed by evolution. Evolution only explains what has happened to life since it first arose. Vast majority of scientists working fields relating to evolution support the theory and the theory continues to have great predictive and explanatory power. The field is only growing with increasing support from findings in molecular genetics.

"Of the scientists and engineers in the United States, only about 5% are creationists, according to a 1991 Gallup poll (Robinson 1995, Witham 1997). However, this number includes those working in fields not related to life origins (such as computer scientists, mechanical engineers, etc.). Taking into account only those working in the relevant fields of earth and life sciences, there are about 480,000 scientists, but only about 700 believe in "creation-science" or consider it a valid theory (Robinson 1995). This means that less than 0.15 percent of relevant scientists believe in creationism. And that is just in the United States, which has more creationists than any other industrialized country. In other countries, the number of relevant scientists who accept creationism drops to less than one tenth of 1 percent. "

Answer 10

The Christians I know don't insist that creation be taught in science class, but please remember that that evolution is a theory, not a proven fact. What most Christians want is for all theories to be explored.