|
Nice Kitty
Industry Role:
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: The good old USA!!!
Posts: 21,053
|
Evolution At The Bar by Philip Mauro
Chapter VII
Estimates Of Darwinism
The Darwinian doctrine of Natural Selection has been discarded by Spencer, Huxley, and other leading evolutionists, who thus leave the theory of Evolution, as it were, suspended in midair, without any method whereby it could work. Mr. Darwin himself had serious misgivings as to his theory, and never regarded it as established.
We consider that the abandonment of Natural Selection must logically involve the abandonment of the entire doctrine of Organic Evolution. It is appropriate, therefore, to make brief reference to the very general repudiation in recent years of the Darwinian concept.
Dr. E. Dennert?s book At the Death-bed of Darwinism gives the testimonies of leading scientists, showing that the title given to his book is fully justified.
Prof. Luther T. Townsend has also written on The Collapse of Evolution, giving testimonies of prominent men of science to the same effect.
St. George Mivart (University College, Kensington, England) says: "With regard to the conception as put forward by Mr. Darwin, I cannot truly characterize it except by an epithet which I employ with great reluctance. I weigh my words, and have present to my mind the many distinguished naturalists who have accepted the notion, and yet I cannot call it anything but a puerile hypothesis."
Prof. Fleischmann of Erlanger, who once accepted Darwinism, but after further investigation repudiated it, says: "The Darwinian theory of descent has not a single fact to confirm it in the realm of nature.
It is not the result of scientific research, but is purely the product of the imagination."
Prof. Haeckel, a most extreme evolutionist, bewails the fact that he is left standing almost alone. He says: "Most modern investigators of science have come to the conclusion that the doctrine of Evolution, and particularly Darwinism, is an error, and cannot be maintained." And he gives an impressive list of "bold and talented scientists" who, he admits, have abandoned the theory of Darwin, though at one time they advocated it. This admission by one of the most noted infidel evolutionists is important. A house thus sharply divided against itself cannot stand.
Dr. Gotte has published an instructive history of Darwinism, showing the stages through which it has passed, from its enthusiastic reception down to its final stage "when its days will evidently soon be numbered."
Edward yon Hartman also shows that Darwinism has passed through four stages, and says that the opposition has now "swelled into a great chorus of voices, aiming at the overthrow of the Darwinian theory. In the first decade of the twentieth century it has become apparent that the days of Darwinism are numbered"; and he gives the names of eminent scientists who are "among its latest opponents."
Prof. Joseph Le Conte, of the University of California, says: "The evidence of geology today is that species seem to come into existence suddenly, and in full perfection, remain substantially unchanged during the term of their existence, and pass away in full perfection. Other species take their places apparently by substitution, not by transmutation."
Dr. Robert Watts says: "The record of the rocks knows nothing of the evolution of a higher form from a lower form .... Both nature and revelation proclaim it as an inviolable law, that like produces like."
Dr. J. B. Warren, of the University of California, said recently: "If the theory of Evolution be true, then, during the many thousands of years covered in whole or in part by present human knowledge, there would certainty be known at least a few instances of the evolution of one species from another. No such instance is known."
Prof. Owen declares that "no instance of change of one species into another has ever been recorded by man."
George Ticknor Curtis, in a recent book, Creation or Evolution, says: "The whole doctrine of the development of distinct species out of other species makes demands upon our credulity which is irreconcilable with those principles by which we regulate, or ought to regulate, our acceptance of any new matter of belief."
Prof. Dana, in his Manual of Geology, says: "Science has no explanation of the origin of life. The living organism, instead of being a product of physical forces, controls those forces for its higher forms, functions and purposes. Its introduction was the grandest event in the world?s early history."
Lord Kelvin, the very foremost of English scientists in his day, in an address delivered in 1903, said: "Forty years ago I asked Liebig, walking somewhere in the country, if he believed that the grass and flowers which we saw around us grew by mere chance force. He answered, ?No; no more than I believe that a book of botany could grow by mere chemical force ..... It is not in dead matter that men live and move, and have their being; but in a creative and directive Power, which science compels us to accept as an article of faith. Is there anything so absurd as to believe that a number of atoms, by falling together of their own accord, could make a crystal, a microbe, or a living animal??"
|