by Bill Nugent
The most common topic I’ve dealt with in 200 DTF articles has been Darwinian evolution. Darwinian evolution with its implicit atheism is far and away the gravest assault on the Christian faith. Darwinism has caused the secularization of society and has brought about the collapse of morals. German philosopher Friedrich Nietzsche (1844 – 1900) was a Darwinian and atheist who disdained to even use the word “morals” but instead used the term “values.”
I am fully satisfied that recent advances in science, especially in the last 50 years, has uncovered evidence that shows the utter impossibility of Darwinian natural selection to bring about the complexity of life. The evidence from microbiology, biochemistry, genetics, information science, paleontology and other fields is abundantly clear. The evolutionists, of course, are also familiar with these recent developments in science. Some, like the 600 signers of the Discovery Institute’s statement dissenting from Darwinism have publicly renounced evolution. Other evolutionists have, sadly, circled the wagons and defended the obsolete 19th century theory of evolution.
One of the best books ever written refuting evolution is Darwin’s Black Box by biochemist Dr. Michael Behe of Lehigh University in Pennsylvania. In this book he shows the mountain of evidence amassed by the new microscope technology that allows researchers to look inside cells to see the cellular machinery.Nuclear magnetic resonance and x-ray crystallography have enabled scientists to see cellular machinery made out of protein. Behe describes the flagellum that a bacteria uses as a propeller. Amazingly, it is an electric motor complete with stator, drive shaft, etc. Behe shows how this is irreducibly complex which means that if one part were missing or deformed the whole thing would be useless. In other words it couldn’t have evolved by a gradual, step by step, random process. Behe describes the microscopic “railroad tracks” laid down in a cell to transport nutrients. The complexity of this and other machinery is beyond words. This had to be created. The evolutionists should not pretend to believe it could happen step by step by chance. To counter Behe, evolutionists have offered several competing far fetched and grossly improbable theories as to how the first living cell could have formed. They can’t even unite around one theory. The theories are so complex they are very difficult to understand and if I dare say that I don’t understand one of the theories I’m likely to be rebuked for “not keeping up with the latest developments in science.”
Behe’s book and other books written by Ph. D. scientists such asEvolution, A Theory In Crisis by Michael Denton and Darwin’s Enigma by William Demski showing the impossibility of evolution have come under attack by evolutionists. In my own experience debating evolutionists over the Internet on email debate groups I have often found evolutionist rebuttals vacuous and often laced with condescending insults. Sometimes they simply assert that “most scientists believe in evolution!” That’s like saying that most people in Saudi Arabia are Muslims. Does that make Islam true? Other evolutionist debaters get so complicated and technical in their replies that they obscure or ignore the scientific evidence I raised in my question! I freely admit that most scientists still believe in evolution. Evolution is a nineteenth century theory. It is well entrenched. It is the establishment position. Scientists are human beings with the same human frailties as anyone else. They formed an attachment to the concept of evolution during their college years and it’s hard for them to rethink their entire frame of mind based on the new scientific evidence presented by Behe and so many others.
A recent book by Dr. Thomas Woodward titled Darwin Strikes Back details the battle over origins. He describes how evolutionists use their positions of influence to stifle dissent. Science is clearly on the side of creation but much political and academic power remains with the evolutionists.