(click to open player in new window)
As I demonstrated in the last video Evolution is generally defined as a scientific theory for how living things change over time. I do acknowledge
that there is indeed validity to it - in what has been observed; hence I think it is important to draw a distinction between evolution and Darwinism.
Darwinism is a metaphysical stance and an ideology. It is assumed as an article of faith that unguided natural processes are sufficient to explain
all living things – so that all appearances of design are just an illusion. In fact, Darwinism is the atheist spin imposed on the theory of
evolution.
Science is usually defined by a process called the scientific method. Typically, this includes an observation about a natural phenomenon, a hypothesis
formulated to explain it, and a test performed via a controlled experiment. The key to the testing process is falsifiability. A positive test result
means a hypothesis is plausible not proven, but a negative test result proves it false. Hence, the proper test of a hypothesis is to make a prediction
and devise a test such that at least one outcome proves the theory false.
Karl Popper is generally regarded as one of the greatest philosophers of science of the 20th century. He is famous for establishing the criteria for
modern scientific inquiry, “Every genuine test of a theory is an attempt to falsify it, or to refute it… . It is easy to obtain confirmations, or
verifications, for nearly every theory—if we look for confirmations. Confirmations should count only if they are the result of risky predictions…
. The criterion of the scientific status of a theory is its falsifiability, or refutability, or testability.”
To put it simply a theory should be considered scientific if and only if it is falsifiable.
The hypothesis that all life on earth evolved from primordial microbes is based on philosophical suppositions about the nature of nature, on models,
on dubious extrapolations, and on guesswork – because it deals with ideas about things that cannot be directly observed or reproduced. The best
scientists can do is create models and work to fit the observable evidence to their models.
With “historical science,” like the evolution or cosmology, it is not always possible to recreate conditions in the “beginning” and perform a
controlled experiments. Still a falsifiable test is possible. For example, the “big bang” hypothesis of cosmology made the risky prediction of
cosmic microwave background radiation. This prediction was found to be true in 1965, the big bang was accepted as plausible, and the then-prevailing
theory that the universe was eternal was falsified. If microwave radiation did not exist, the big bang theory would have been falsified. Thus we now
the Biblical creation event written over 3000 years ago by ancient Hebrews is scientifically accurate, "In the begining God created the universe from
nothing".
The neo-Darwinian paradigm is a synthesis of two overarching hypotheses: the hypothesis of Common Ancestry and the hypothesis of Random Mutation and
Natural Selection as the means of evolutionary development. The evidence for these two is anything but compelling; they involve an enormous
extrapolation from evidence of very limited ranges to conclusions far beyond the evidence. The fundamental problem with evolution as a scientific
theory is that it unfalsifiable because it relies on random, unpredictable mutations. Darwinism is insufficiently precise to have negative
implications, and so is immunized from experiential falsification. In this since it is no different that the Gods of the gaps argument. Karl Popper
stated that Darwinism is "not a testable scientific theory, but a metaphysical research programme."
Embryologist and geneticist C. H. Waddington says, “The theory of evolution is unfalsifiable… If an animal evolves one way, biologists have a
perfectly good explanation; but if it evolves some other way, they have an equally good explanation… . The theory is not … a predictive theory as
to what must happen.”
Darwinism is indeed a faith based initiative.
According to the American Heritage Dictionary:
Mythology (n): “A body or collection of myths belonging to a people and addressing their origin, history, deities, ancestors, and heroes.”
Myth (n): “A traditional, typically ancient story dealing with supernatural beings, ancestors, or heroes that serves as a fundamental type in the
worldview of a people, as by explaining aspects of the natural world or delineating the psychology, customs, or ideals of society.”
Darwinism definitely addresses origins so it qualifies on that point. Evolution explains origins to a culture that either rejects a supernatural God
or believes God is uninvolved in at least some aspects of creation. Evolution serves the sociological purpose of validating the thinking and practices
of an atheistic culture that puts its faith in undirected natural processes.
A myth can be based on truth or fiction—or it may contain an element of truth within a fantastical story. But a defining characteristic of a myth is
that it is hard to prove with the technology of the culture; a myth requires faith. The significance of a myth, therefore, is not so much whether it
is true or false, but that it defines the worldview and forms part of the foundation of a culture.
Modern evolutionary theory definitely meets this important characteristic of a myth as well: according to Ernst Mayr, affectionately referred to as
the “Darwin of the 20th Century,” evolution is “man’s worldview today.”
Because Darwinism fails to qualify as science yet meets the qualifications of mythology - the proper term for evolution as it is believed by
naturalists is -
A Creation Myth.
Creation myths from nearly all ancient cultures involve a powerful, supernatural “god” who creates the world and all of nature. The distinction of
Darwinism that inspires the devotion of atheists is that everything is based on a random natural process called natural selection. Yet as one reads
the literature, whenever a miracle is needed, natural selection is invoked with a reverence that Christians reserve for God. For instance, one of the
main architects of the new evolutionary synthesis, Sir Julian Huxley describes evolution as “a universal and all-pervading process” that is
“the whole of reality.”
In his book The Blind Watchmaker, Richard Dawkins is famous for asserting that Natural selection is responsible for the existence of life.
Natural selection, the blind, unconscious, automatic process which Darwin discovered, and which we now know is the explanation for the existence and
apparently purposeful form of all life has no purpose in mind.
(Dawkins, Blind Watchmaker)
Obviously this is not a scientific statement - by definition natural selection requires existing reproducing life – this is a metaphysical claim
that elevates natural selection to the status of a self existent causal agent. It is this sort of fantastical proclamation that exposes Darwinism as a
quasi religious faith for atheists. Darwin's ideas are being ideologically manipulated, just as they were a few decades ago in Nazi Germany.
Harvard biologist Edward O. Wilson, a devoted Darwinist, wrote in his book On Human Nature, ‘The evolutionary epic is probably the best myth we will
ever have.’ The worth of the Epic he explained as -“The true evolutionary epic retold as poetry, is as intrinsically ennobling as any religious
epic” (Wilson Consilience 1998)
He makes a good point because in the final analysis Darwinism really is a religious epic.
Darwin’s mythology was not composed while observing wild life in the Galapagos Island as revisionist history likes to assert. Darwinism truly began
as a creation myth as evidenced by this poem from his grandfather Erasmus Darwin which was published nearly 60 years prior to On the Origin of
Species.
The Temple of Nature
Organic life beneath the shoreless waves
Was born and nurs'd in ocean's pearly caves;
First forms minute, unseen by spheric glass,
Move on the mud, or pierce the watery mass;
These, as successive generations bloom,
New powers acquire and larger limbs assume;
Whence countless groups of vegetation spring,
And breathing realms of fin and feet and wing.
www.english.upenn.edu...
This provides clear evidence that Darwin's metaphysical pseudoscience like the tree of life, was based on presuppositions gleaned form his
grandfather's bedtime stories rather than true observational science.
Ernst von Haeckel was the chief apostle of Darwinism in Germany – he not only viewed Darwinism as a religion he had visions taking over the
Christian churches and converting them to churches of Darwinism. Are Haeckels visions of commandeering church facilities and filing them with symbols
of science so far fetched? Atheist Joseph Stalin certainly put this into practice by demolishing Churches, torturing Christians and indoctrinating
atheism. Are not today’s atheists taking an aggressive posture that science has supplanted God? Christians are being characterized as delusional
and holding back the progress of humanity. The high priest of Darwinism Richard Dawkins has put out the word to the atheist community that it is time
to stop being respectful of other’s beliefs. As the world nears the institution of world government, Dawkins and crew are poised to fulfill
Haeckel's dark Orwellian nightmare and impose the New World Order religion of Darwinsim.
[edit on 5/14/2009 by Bigwhammy]
[edit on 5/14/2009 by Bigwhammy]
