THE DOGMA OF DARWIN'S THEORY
(last updated: 3rd August 2021)


Now is perhaps the time for the scientific community to come to terms with the fact that many of the current claims made for Darwin's theory that are being presented in schools, and Universities, can no longer be sustained, and more modest and realistic ones made about its capabilities along the lines of those proposed by Michael Behe. An honest judgement should be made now that Darwin's theory cannot, and never will, account for the origin of life. Darwin's book 'On the Origin of Species' is famous for endlessly quoting terms such as, 'we may naturally infer', 'we may suppose', or 'we have every reason to believe', in the absence of any firm scientific underpinning evidence. The Origin of Species in fact uses expressions 'we infer' and 'we may well suppose.' more than 800 times and guided by these flimsy phrases, we are expected to reach the conclusion that man climbed from beasthood and before that, from a single cell, without intervention from God. This was not science it was pure conjecture, figments of a fertile imagination, yet it has been adopted by many in science today despite recent firm evidence from ID that dispute many of its claims, and no new verifiable evidence to support them. This eagerness to dispense with the Bible account of origins means that when contrary evidence is brought to light it is roundly ignored. It would be helpful if TV wildlife presenters and others refrained from suggesting that all life came into existence via Neo-Darwinian processes, without attempting to provide any supporting scientific evidence. In truth there isn't any credible scientific evidence to support the notion that life came about through Neo-Darwinian processes, only opinions can be brought to bear, so they claim that living forms came into existence steadily over a period of 3.4 billion years as if this somehow settles the argument. The method is to keep on using the 'e' word and in the end people take it for granted. This fad is based on what is called 'pretend knowledge' according to Behe.

The 'e' word = 'evolved'

Amongst many in the scientific community the issues surrounding Darwin's Theory have become steeped in dogma but it is surely only a matter of time before attitudes change as more and more contrary evidence is brought to light, and we are not talking billions of years, or even thousands of years. According to Marcos Eberlin 10 years should suffice (from 2020), and the battle for hearts and minds will be won:

If you are still not convinced that the answer lies in intelligent design look no further than the work of Marcos Eberlin a superstar Brazilian chemist.

Marcos Eberlin

You will by now have gathered, based on our arguments above and statements on other pages, that we have come to fully accept the position set by the ID movement that there is intelligent design in nature, and the good news is that it reinforces the traditional understanding that life came about as an act of creation by an Almighty God. The ID community of scientists do not generally dispute this obvious conclusion but rightly insist that their discoveries are not informed, or influenced in any way, by the Genesis account in the Bible.

This illustration conveys how information reliably points to design far more easily than deconstructing all of the junk science floating around the Internet claiming that natural processes can generate large quantities of information for free

Convincing evidence for Design from Evolution News

All can replicate themselves with seeming ease, an act far beyond even the most complex human artifact. Some can even reconstruct themselves completely from tiny fractions cut surgically from the cell!

The complexity of cells from Evolution News