Only a very few research scientists have the opportunity to work against that disjointed view by openly studying life as something clearly and cleverly designed. I am one and can count the others on my fingers. There re more wwho would like to have this opportunity, as shown every now and then by a paper that gets past the policing system of an establishment science journal. A recent example isa description of the architecture of the human hand as being “the proper design by the Creator t perform multitude of daily tasks in a comfortable way.” Infractions like this always ” almost always bring a reprimand. Everyone must decide for himself or herself what they can do under the shadow of the materialist flag, knowing that if they press too hard they may lose even the small opportunities they once had.
Real case histories bear this out, time and again. Two months after this paper on the human hand was published, it was retracted—not by the authors but by the journal ( PloS One), and not for any technical error that could be described but because of “concerns with the scientific rationale, presentation, and language.” (p. 265)
Everyone really knows that if the authors had ended with a fatuous endorsement of Darwin and naturalist atheism, that would have been okay. Darwin is a free frontal lobotomy that comes with a tenure plan. What else did you want to know?
We choose to fund this.
See also: Doug Axe presents his thesis
Follow UD News at Twitter!