Are We Hearing The Death Gargles Of Darwinism???


Today I am going to post a few short youtubes for you concerning intelligent design and the Dover Trial. One video that I find is most interesting is from Dr Bradley Monton who is an atheist and he speaks about the Dover ruling against ID and how ID shouldn’t be ruled out as a valid scientific approach. He has even written a book called “Seeking God in Science: An Atheist Defends Intelligent Design”.

The Dover ruling has been critiqued HERE, in “3 myths about the Dover Intelligent Design Trial”.

I will also include a link that debunks the notion that no ID scientist has ever been peer reviewed, you can find that HERE. I have been in debate with quite a few people over the years that say that very thing… that creationists or ID scientists are not REAL scientists because of their lack of peer reviewed work. Well, obviously that is NOT the case.

One thing that I am seeing more and more these days, is that Darwinism is losing the battle as we become more aware of things at the micro-level. Darwinism is being left out in the cold and even the major defenders of it grapple with the appearance of the seemingly intricate designs at the micro-level and even on a cosmological level. Naturalistic science only goes so far, but stops at the philosophical level of the beginning of beginnings, or the unmoved mover as Aristotle spoke about.

So without further ado, here are some videos for you to watch…




One thought on “Are We Hearing The Death Gargles Of Darwinism???

    James M. Tour
    “… I will tell you as a scientist and a synthetic chemist: if anybody should be able to understand evolution, it is me, because I make molecules for a living, and I don’t just buy a kit, and mix this and mix this, and get that. I mean, ab initio, I make molecules. I understand how hard it is to make molecules.” 1

    “Let me tell you what goes on in the back rooms of science – with National Academy members, with Nobel Prize winners. I have sat with them, and when I get them alone, not in public – because it’s a scary thing, if you say what I just said – I say, “Do you understand all of this, where all of this came from, and how this happens?” Every time that I have sat with people who are synthetic chemists, who understand this, they go “Uh-uh. Nope.” 1

    Decades ago, it was thought that all life could be plotted on a tree like graph with the single common ancestor at the base of the tree, then all the branches and leaves would represent the divergence of organisms as they evolved. Today however, there is no tree. All the guessing by homology is not inline with the genome evidence of today. Some say the tree has become a sort of shrub or bush with a tangled mess of data that is becoming more difficult to reconcile as genetic data piles up. Others talk about multiple individual trees.


Comments are closed.