Uncommon Descent Serving The Intelligent Design Community

Darwinism creates nothing except jobs for Darwinists.

arroba Email

From Leonard Krishtalka (July 19, 2011) at LJWORLD (Lawrence, Kansas), we hear the grim news, “Science takes a beating in early presidential campaign”: Referring to candidate Michelle Bachmann’s comments,

“I support intelligent design,” she said, reported CNN. “What I support is putting all science on the table and then letting students decide.”

Krishtalka disagrees, saying,

… knowledge of evolution is an economic necessity. It underpins U.S. and global R&D on the production of the world’s food, fiber, fuel and pharmaceuticals.

How, exactly does it do that?, a friend of Uncommon Descent writes to ask: “Do you have a paper or quote that refutes the ‘teaching more evolution increases the state’s economy” myth?

Friend, it’s much harder to refute utter nonsense than to refute a viable but mistaken proposition. This, as it happens, is utter nonsense. Promotion of Darwinism has a purely negative impact on economic growth: Darwinism creates nothing except jobs for Darwinists, many of them funded by taxpayers who doubt the ideology. It’s no accident that Bachmann is a Tea Party favourite.

We would get the same impact from instituting court-ordered astrology classes. Given sociologist Steve Fuller’s view that Darwinism is indeed today’s astrology, we’d be on track. But one form of legislated nonsense on the curriculum is enough, surely.

See also: Darwinism is the astrology of science

Darwinism is in the same sort of mess that floored astrology

Ms. O'Leary, you may find this of related interest; Evolutionary Psychology Is So 1980 Excerpt: In other words, who needs these storytelling clowns? (Search on “evolutionary psychology” in our search bar for lots of laughs and groans.) http://crev.info/content/evolutionary_psychology_is_so_1980 bornagain77
further notes: Materialists like to claim evolution is indispensable to experimental biology and led the way to many breakthroughs in medicine, Yet in a article entitled "Evolutionary theory contributes little to experimental biology", this expert author begs to differ. "Certainly, my own research with antibiotics during World War II received no guidance from insights provided by Darwinian evolution. Nor did Alexander Fleming's discovery of bacterial inhibition by penicillin. I recently asked more than 70 eminent researchers if they would have done their work differently if they had thought Darwin's theory was wrong. The responses were all the same: No. Philip S. Skell - Professor at Pennsylvania State University. http://www.discovery.org/a/2816 Podcasts and Article of Dr. Skell http://www.evolutionnews.org/2010/11/giving_thanks_for_dr_philip_sk040981.html Darwinian Medicine and Proximate and Evolutionary Explanations - Michael Egnor - neurosurgeon - June 2011 http://www.evolutionnews.org/2011/06/darwinian_medicine_and_proxima047701.html Science Owes Nothing To Darwinian Evolution - Jonathan Wells - video http://www.metacafe.com/watch/4028096 I think Michael Behe does an excellent job, in this following debate, of pointing out that denying the overwhelming evidence for design in biology makes the science of biology ‘irrational’. As well Dr. Behe makes it clear that materialistic evolutionists themselves, by their own admission in many cases, are promoting their very own religious viewpoint, Atheism, in public schools, and thus are in fact violating the establishment clause of the constitution: Should Intelligent Design Be Taught as Science? Michael Behe debates Stephen Barr - 2010 - video http://www.isi.org/lectures/flvplayer/lectureplayer.aspx?file=v000355_cicero_040710.mp4&dir=mp4/lectures Here is an atheist professor who openly proselytizes his religion in his classroom: Dr. Will Provine on Religion and Creationism - video https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nnMjaw8zUxQ Evolution Is Religion--Not Science by Henry Morris, Ph.D. Excerpt: Evolution is promoted by its practitioners as more than mere science. Evolution is promulgated as an ideology, a secular religion—a full-fledged alternative to Christianity, with meaning and morality,,, Evolution is a religion. This was true of evolution in the beginning, and it is true of evolution still today. Darwinian atheist Michael Ruse - Prominent Philosopher I found this following paper particularly interesting for broadly outlining how evolution misses the mark for a true science and is, in reality, a pseudo-science: Is evolution pseudoscience? Excerpt:,,, Thus, of the ten characteristics of pseudoscience listed in the Skeptic’s Dictionary, evolution meets nine. Few other?pseudosciences — astrology, astral projection, alien abduction, crystal power, or whatever — would meet so many. http://creation.com/is-evolution-pseudoscience C.S. Lewis: creationist and anti-evolutionist Excerpt: "In 1951 C S Lewis wrote that evolution was “the central and radical lie in the whole web of falsehood that now governs our lives” and modern civilization. Evolution, Lewis explained, is a picture of reality that has resulted from imagination and is “not the logical result of what is vaguely called ‘modern science’.” ================== Lest we forget the untold tragedy visited upon mankind by atheistic ideology: Chairman MAO: Genocide Master “…Many scholars and commentators have referenced my total of 174,000,000 for the democide (genocide and mass murder) of the last century. I’m now trying to get word out that I’ve had to make a major revision in my total due to two books. I’m now convinced that that Stalin exceeded Hitler in monstrous evil, and Mao beat out Stalin….” http://wadias.in/site/arzan/blog/chairman-mao-genocide-master/ ,,,and don't get me started on the negative impact of abortion in this country!!! etc.. etc.. bornagain77
notes as to 'Darwinism is the astrology of science' Should You Trust the Monkey Mind? Excerpt: Evolutionary naturalism assumes that our noetic equipment developed as it did because it had some survival value or reproductive advantage. Unguided evolution does not select for belief except insofar as the belief improves the chances of survival. The truth of a belief is irrelevant, as long as it produces an evolutionary advantage. This equipment could have developed at least four different kinds of belief that are compatible with evolutionary naturalism, none of which necessarily produce true and trustworthy cognitive faculties. http://www.firstthings.com/onthesquare/2010/09/should-you-trust-the-monkey-mind What is the Evolutionary Argument Against Naturalism? (‘inconsistent identity’ of cause leads to failure of absolute truth claims for materialists) (Alvin Plantinga) – video http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5yNg4MJgTFw Can atheists trust their own minds? – William Lane Craig On Alvin Plantinga’s Evolutionary Argument Against Naturalism – video http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=byN38dyZb-k “But then with me the horrid doubt always arises whether the convictions of man’s mind, which has been developed from the mind of the lower animals, are of any value or at all trustworthy. Would any one trust in the convictions of a monkey’s mind, if there are any convictions in such a mind?” – Charles Darwin – Letter To William Graham – July 3, 1881 It is also interesting to point out that this ‘inconsistent identity’, pointed out by Plantinga, which leads to the failure of neo-Darwinists to make absolute truth claims for their beliefs, is what also leads to the failure of neo-Darwinists to be able to account for objective morality, in that neo-Darwinists cannot maintain a consistent identity towards a cause for objective morality; The Knock-Down Argument Against Atheist Sam Harris – William Lane Craig – video http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tvDyLs_cReE “Atheists may do science, but they cannot justify what they do. When they assume the world is rational, approachable, and understandable, they plagiarize Judeo-Christian presuppositions about the nature of reality and the moral need to seek the truth. As an exercise, try generating a philosophy of science from hydrogen coming out of the big bang. It cannot be done. It’s impossible even in principle, because philosophy and science presuppose concepts that are not composed of particles and forces. They refer to ideas that must be true, universal, necessary and certain.” - Crevo Headlines This following video humorously reveals the bankruptcy that atheists have in trying to ground beliefs within a materialistic worldview; John Cleese – The Scientists – humorous video http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-M-vnmejwXo ============ Materialism simply dissolves into absurdity when pushed to extremes and certainly offers no guarantee to us for believing our perceptions and reasoning within science are trustworthy in the first place: Dr. Bruce Gordon – The Absurdity Of The Multiverse & Materialism in General – video http://www.metacafe.com/watch/5318486/ This following site is a easy to use, and understand, interactive website that takes the user through what is termed ‘Presuppositional apologetics’. The website clearly shows that our use of the laws of logic, mathematics, science and morality cannot be accounted for unless we believe in a God who guarantees our perceptions and reasoning are trustworthy in the first place. Proof That God Exists – easy to use interactive website http://www.proofthatgodexists.org/index.php THE GOD OF THE MATHEMATICIANS – DAVID P. GOLDMAN – August 2010 Excerpt: we cannot construct an ontology that makes God dispensable. Secularists can dismiss this as a mere exercise within predefined rules of the game of mathematical logic, but that is sour grapes, for it was the secular side that hoped to substitute logic for God in the first place. Gödel’s critique of the continuum hypothesis has the same implication as his incompleteness theorems: Mathematics never will create the sort of closed system that sorts reality into neat boxes. http://www.faqs.org/periodicals/201008/2080027241.html etc.. etc.. etc.. cell is fantastically complex; https://uncommondesc.wpengine.com/darwinism/anyone-else-for-the-myth-of-junk-dna-richard-dawkins-for-one/#comment-390162 bornagain77

Leave a Reply