Darwinism Intelligent Design News

LiveScience now permits Darwin doubt?

Spread the love


One of Charles Darwin’s hypotheses posits that closely related species will compete for food and other resources more strongly with one another than with distant relatives, because they occupy similar ecological niches. Most biologists long have accepted this to be true.

Thus, three researchers were more than a little shaken to find that their experiments on fresh water green algae failed to support Darwin’s theory — at least in one case.

“It was completely unexpected,” says Bradley Cardinale, associate professor in the University of Michigan’s school of natural resources & environment. “When we saw the results, we said ‘this can’t be.”‘ We sat there banging our heads against the wall. Darwin’s hypothesis has been with us for so long, how can it not be right?”

Um …

Those guys you got fired were trying to tell you something.

Actually these types of problems have been around for quite a while but everyone who finds a piece of them walks the plank, so … the editors had better moderate the comments, or find themselves spending the weekend in Troll Knoll.

Follow UD News at Twitter!

7 Replies to “LiveScience now permits Darwin doubt?

  1. 1
    jw777 says:


    If only there were a website which had tabulated all of the failed expectations and predictions of Darwinian evolution…


    Oh, wait, no – that’s the apologetics website religiously (or was it rigorously) devoted to defending all of these contradictions.

    If only something else were out there…

  2. 2
    ppolish says:

    Love the line “Darwin was obsessed with competition, but we found that one third of the algae actually liked eachother”.

    The other two thirds were pretty mellow too lol

  3. 3
    Barb says:

    Darwin’s hypothesis has been with us for so long, how can it not be right?”

    Users of the scientific method know that when the data don’t support your hypothesis, you revise your hypothesis. You don’t bang your head against the wall…unless you went into the experiment having some sort of bias.

  4. 4
    Dionisio says:

    Barb @ 3

    unless you went into the experiment having some sort of bias.

    Oh, no, that’s not possible, because they always take unbiased approaches;-)

    We don’t understand evolution 😉

  5. 5
    Robert Byers says:

    So they are saying Darwins idea is just a hypothesis on this point??
    AMEN . Its all unsupported hypothesis.

  6. 6
    Barb says:

    Dionisio @ 4: Like the researchers who didn’t look for lncRNA when testing mice?

  7. 7
    EvolvedSelf says:

    “If only something else were out there…”

    I critique “darwinism” at . See particularly the “Contrarian Evolutionist.”

Leave a Reply