Is the theory of Evolution authentically scientific? (I)

(Excerpted from the author’s paper, “Richard Dawkins’ Foundations of Morality: A Critical Evaluation” [MA Philosophy, University of the Philippines, Diliman, Philippines]. You, too, can have your lectures, readings, modules, researches, articles, etc. posted here. Send them through e-mail to OurHappySchool@yahoo.com.)

IT WAS CHARLES LYELL book Principles of Geology (1830) that inspired Charles Darwin to publish his work Origin of Species in 1859. After his book came out of the press, Darwin out-famed Lyell and the idea of organic evolution “spread like wildfire, and caught the imagination of all intellectuals.” [31] This novel thought soon “revolutionized the very thinking of man and had significant repercussions on the life and morals of all Western civilization.” [32] Though renowned scientists like Darwin’s teacher Adam Sedgwick took exception to many of his student’s propositions, “the majority of scientists and the general public accepted the theory of evolution by Natural Selection as a proven fact.” [33]

Today, the theory of evolution’s basic principles have permeated human thought and influenced institutions to a large extent that anyone who opposes the theory of evolution is taken to be an enemy of science and human progress. He is dubbed as an obscurantist by its avid proponents like Richard Dawkins (British biologist, author of popular science books such as the controversial The God Delusion [2006]). “Even publicity agents like newspapers and the B.B.C. refuse to publish anything against the evolutionary concept” [34]. But do all scientists agree that evolution should be believed in as a scientific fact? Is it really true that to be scientific is to be an evolutionist? ...

It is very important to note here however that… we are concerned here with analysis… and not necessarily with metaphysics.

World-class scientists skeptical on evolution/ natural selection

‘100 vs. 1”

Lest people suppose that to advocate evolution is necessarily to support science, and that Dawkins’ moral theory, as it is evolutionistic, must be consequently accepted by people who believe in science, it’s a must that we set here evolution’s real status as a theory in science….

… So let’s tackle questions like, do all authorities in different fields of science agree that evolution must be accepted without a doubt? Is it true, as Darwinists like Dawkins suggest, that to reject evolution is to refuse to believe in science?

In 2004… award-winning investigative journalist at the Chicago Tribune and authors of winning books Lee Strobel published his another New York Times bestseller book which tackles about evolution, Darwinism, sciences, theism, and atheism. Well convinced that Darwinism had made the idea of a Creator irrelevant and admitting that it was science which paved his way to atheism, Strobel was astonished to learn the two-paged advertisement in The Weekly Standard by a hundred of respected and distinguished scientists openly submitting their significant skepticism toward Darwinian theory. Here is how Strobel introduces in his book the said advertisement:

“There were one hundred of them—biologists, chemists, zoologists, physicists, anthropologists, molecular and cell biologists, bioengineers, organic chemists, geologists, astrophysicists, and other scientists. Their doctorates came from such prestigious universities as Cambridge, Princeton, Purdue, Duke, Michigan, Syracuse, Temple, and Berkeley.

“They included professorsfrom Yale Graduate School, the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Tulane, Rice, Emory, George Mason, Lehigh, and the Universities of California, Washington, Texas, Florida, North California, Wisconsin, Ohio, Colorado, Nebraska, Missouri, Iowa, Georgia, New Mexico, Utah, Pennsylvania, and elsewhere.

“Among them was the director of the Center for Computational Quantum Chemistry and scientists at the Plasma Physics Lab at Princeton, the National Museum of Natural History at the Smithsonian Institute, the Los Alamos National Laboratory, and the LawrenceLivermore Laboratories.

“Andthey wanted the world to know one thing: they are skeptical.”  [35] (emphasis added)

Skeptical! What it means by the phrase “they are skeptical” and on which these contemporary renowned scientists are skeptical are further clarified by Strobel:

“After spokespersons for the Public Broadcasting System’s seven-part television series Evolution asserted that “all known scientific evidence supports (Darwinian) evolution” as does “virtually every reputable scientist in the world,” these professors, laboratory researchers, and other scientists published a two-page advertisement in a national magazine under the banner: “A Scientific Dissent From Darwinism.”

“Their statement was direct and defiant. ‘We are skeptical of claims for the ability of random mutation and natural selection to account for the complexity of life,’ They said, ‘Careful examination of the evidence for Darwinian theory should be encouraged.’” [36] (emphasis added)

Perhaps anticipating a quick ad hominem rebuttal from Darwin’s fanatics, Strobel continues, thus:

“These were not narrow-minded fundamentalists, backwoods West Virginia protesters, or rabid religious fanatics—just respected, world-class scientist like Nobel nominee Henry F. Schaefer, the third most cited chemist in the world; James Tour of Rice University’s Center for Nanoscale Science and Technology; and Fred Figworth, professor of cellular and molecular physiology at Yale Graduate School.

“Together, despite the specter of professional persecution, they broached the politically incorrect opinion that the emperor of evolution has no clothes.” [37] (emphasis added)

Trained in investigative writing and propelled by his love of science as the “search for the truth”, Strobel was compelled to reassess his ‘faith’ in Darwinism by probing what “science has been busy writing over the past few decades”. His approach was cross-examining authorities in various scientific disciplines about the most current findings in their fields. He sought “doctorate-level professors who have unquestioned expertise” to interview. He stood in the shoes of the skeptic, reading all sides of each topic and posing the toughest objections that have been raised. The product of the interviews became the core contents of his international hit The Case for a Creator (2004), on the back cover of which he wrote his conclusion, “My road to atheism was paved by science … but, ironically, so was my later journey to God.”…

Darwin himself ‘doubted evolution’, and so do scientists after him

Charles Darwin himself, the instant celebrity and now a historical figure especially in the field of science for fathering the theory of Evolution, is said to gradually become aware of the lack of real evidence for his evolutionary speculation. In his later days he was quoted to have written: “As by this theory, innumerable transitional forms must have existed. Why do we not find them embedded in the crust of the earth? Why is not all nature in confusion instead of being, as we see them, well defined species?” [38] This is also the reason Darwin is said to have recanted towards the end of his life [39]. In fact, Darwin’s ardent supporters like H.H. Newman, after a century of research, are forced to confess: “Reluctant as he (Darwin) may be, honesty compels the evolutionist to admit, that there is no absolute proof of organic evolution.”[40]

It is not unexpected therefore that after Darwin’s death in 1882, the theory he proposed was refused by many experts in different fields of science in the early 90’s, not to mention the respected authorities in sciences in contemporary era as discussed earlier. Some of the well known scientists right after Darwin’s time who are not only reluctant to uphold but also in direct opposition to evolutionary theory are Louis Agassiz, professor of Harvard University; William Bateson, F.R.S., of Cambridge University; Professor R. Goldschmidt of the University of California; Sir William Dawson, Professor of Geology; Dr. A.H. Clark of the U.S. National Museum, Washington; Dr. George Gaylord Simpson of the American Museum of Natural History… etc… [41] … (with continuation)

*Notes and references are found in the footnotes of the paper from which this article was taken.

 

Click OurHappySchool.com Facebook account to "Like" this website. Thanks.

(Contributions [essays, poems, blogs, lectures, researches, etc.] are sent through e-mail to ourhappyschool@yahoo.com. For comments, queries, and suggestions, kindly visit our Facebook Page and  Facebook accounts . )

© 2010 OurHappySchool.com. All rights reserved.

 

Related articles:

Is the theory of Evolution authentically scientific? (II)

Is the theory of Evolution authentically scientific? (III)

 

How to cite this article:

Jensen DG. Mañebog. “Is the Theory of Evolution authentically scientific? (I)" @ www.OurHappySchool.com

Subjects:

Comments

<p> I frankly don&#39;t believe in the theory of evolution because i don&#39;t think that the human race in which we belong came from apes. Also, if this theory will considered as true, then why do we still have apes and monkeys today? My statement may sound funny but if you will just think about it you may end up wondering the same way as i do.</p>

based on this statement: "But do all scientists agree that evolution should be believed in as a scientific fact? Is it really true that to be scientific is to be an evolutionist? ..." not all facts that encounter in this world is all answer by scientific ways.... maybe, in some facts pertaining to what may people do to our lives more sufficient and effective...

Theory of evolution is not absolutely truth. Because they have no reason or proof that this theory has a foundation of evidence.Lack of basis to show how true is this theory.

Theory of evolution is not absolutely truth. Because they have no reason or proof that this theory has a foundation of evidence.Lack of basis to show how true is this theory.

Theory of evolution is not absolutely truth. Because they have no reason or proof that this theory has a foundation of evidence.Lack of basis to show how true is this theory.

The Theory of Evolution is a theory, but guess what? When scientists use the word theory, it has a different meaning to normal everyday use.That's right, it all comes down to the multiple meanings of the word theory. If you said to a scientist that you didn't believe in evolution because it was "just a theory", they'd probably be a bit puzzled.

Theory are accepted facts that attempts to provide a explanation on a certain topic. In this case, this theory for evolution may not be accurate. I still don't believe in this theory because like what I said, theory are just accepted facts and have no enough evidence to prove that this is true.

The Theory of Evolution is just a theory but when we say theory, it means that it is a study or accepted facts. We can say that this is just a theory but many believes in this. Majority are believing that we all came from our creator, God.

from its word "theory" means opinion or concept.. even charles darwin 'creator' of this theory does not have enough evidence to prove that his theory was real .. how can you possibly believed in the case that there were missing evidence (for example in a criminal case..) and why do we still have monkeys na hindi pa nagiging tao.. ? cguro dati may ganung uri na ng hayop na prang tao..

Many archaeologist believe that human beings came from ape. Traces were found after through studies and experimentation using high tech tools and equipment. Some of them will risk their lives or to travel different places or countries just to get enough information and data about evolution. On the other hand, church leaders undoubtedly believe that God created human and all living things as well. It is based from the holy bible. Many of us still uncertain about evolution issue though most of us also believe that we had have learned from our parents, teachers, church leaders and many more. Since this is a democratic country, we should respect what others idea about this issue refrain from being judgmental or expressive. I should say as this will not end and clashes will soon arise. But for me, I still believe on the existence of our Creator and He controls everything on this planet and His scriptures really indicate that He made us. I have nothing against our great scientist and its their freewill to give their own comment and also to other people concerned relating to this irrelevant issue. Lastly, people will continue research/ study and gather more evidence pertaining to scientific evolution and leaders from different religions will continue impart their knowledge about the existence of God but all of these should leave each other respected and understand our insights.

The theory It serves as a general introduction to the debatable subject, intended to be accessible to those with little technical knowledge of the area. It has been highly successful, considered by many as the definitive publication of its type.

Many archaeologist believe that human beings came from ape. Traces were found after through studies and experimentation using high tech tools and equipment. Some of them will risk their lives or to travel different places or countries just to get enough information and data about evolution. On the other hand, church leaders undoubtedly believe that God created human and all living things as well. It is based from the holy bible. Many of us still uncertain about evolution issue though most of us also believe that we had have learned from our parents, teachers, church leaders and many more. Since this is a democratic country, we should respect what others idea about this issue refrain from being judgmental or expressive. I should say as this will not end and clashes will soon arise. But for me, I still believe on the existence of our Creator and He controls everything on this planet and His scriptures really indicate that He made us. I have nothing against our great scientist and its their freewill to give their own comment and also to other people concerned relating to this irrelevant issue. Lastly, people will continue research/ study and gather more evidence pertaining to scientific evolution and leaders from different religions will continue impart their knowledge about the existence of God but all of these should leave each other respected and understand our insights.

Many archaeologist believe that human beings came from ape. Traces were found after through studies and experimentation using high tech tools and equipment. Some of them will risk their lives or to travel different places or countries just to get enough information and data about evolution. On the other hand, church leaders undoubtedly believe that God created human and all living things as well. It is based from the holy bible. Many of us still uncertain about evolution issue though most of us also believe that we had have learned from our parents, teachers, church leaders and many more. Since this is a democratic country, we should respect what others idea about this issue refrain from being judgmental or expressive. I should say as this will not end and clashes will soon arise. But for me, I still believe on the existence of our Creator and He controls everything on this planet and His scriptures really indicate that He made us. I have nothing against our great scientist and its their freewill to give their own comment and also to other people concerned relating to this irrelevant issue. Lastly, people will continue research/ study and gather more evidence pertaining to scientific evolution and leaders from different religions will continue impart their knowledge about the existence of God but all of these should leave each other respected and understand our insights.

I still believe on the existence of our Creator and He controls everything on this planet and His scriptures really indicate that He made us. I have nothing against our great scientist and its their freewill to give their own comment and also to other people concerned relating to this irrelevant issue. Lastly, people will continue research/ study and gather more evidence pertaining to scientific evolution and leaders from different religions will continue impart their knowledge about the existence of God but all of these should leave each other respected and understand our insights.

This is a reply to Janine Gonzale's post; Earth is a piece of perfect art work together with its inhabitants before time immemorial. Evolution theory is nothing but a mere science project molded to gather attention from those who believe that God doesn't exist. It boils down to references as scientists to science while religious to religions and bible. They are two different entities in a single corner trying to vie the spot as to who made who, how and when. We can only speculate. Confronted with imperfections, every interpretations might not be solid to support their claims that humans were basically just evolved from another species...........

There are lots of theory that explain the evolution of human but I still believe that human are created by the Lord our God,,He created us because of His love.

there are lots of theory that explain the evolution of human being,,but I still believe that human are created by the Lord our God because of His love for us.

The theory It serves as a general introduction to the debatable subject, intended to be accessible to those with little technical knowledge of the area. It has been highly successful, considered by many as the definitive publication of its type but I believe that God created human and all living things as well. It is based from the holy bible.

there are lots of theory that explains evolution,,but I still i believe that e human came are created by the Lord our God because of His love for us.

Theory of evolution is not absolutely truth. Because they have no reason or proof that this theory has a foundation of evidence.Lack of basis to show how true is this theory.

Theory are accepted facts that attempts to provide a explanation on a certain topic. In this case, this theory for evolution may not be accurate. I still don't believe in this theory because like what I said, theory are just accepted facts and have no enough evidence to prove that this is true.

hahhahahahahh

This is my reaction to the comment of Janine Gonzales: i believe in God and that we are his creation. That is what we have been taught, from our parents, in school and of course the Bible. but in saying this, i still do find resemblance in us humans and apes, that is why scientists are always looking for answers and having their own theories that they share to the world.

This is my reaction to the comment of Janine Gonzales: I agree on her statement on GOD creating us humans just as written in the Bible that humans alone are "created in the image of God. I do respect the theories on evolution but I don't believe that we humans came from apes. Just a thought if we really did evolved from monkeys then why do they still exist? Shouldn't they be gone for we are the result of their evolved species? We are humans not God, our knowledge is limited.

This is my reaction to the comment of Janine Gonzales: I agree on her statement on GOD creating us humans just as written in the Bible that humans alone are "created in the image of God. I do respect the theories on evolution but I don't believe that we humans came from apes. Just a thought if we really did evolved from monkeys then why do they still exist? Shouldn't they be gone for we are the result of their evolved species? We are humans not God, our knowledge is limited.

as what Theory Means it is only a opinion which is also a possible thing to prove that we are scientifically created by that theory

Add new comment

Sponsored Links