I would like to make a few points clear before going further. I do not oppose the idea of “evolution.” Evolution is change through time. Obviously organisms and everything else changes through time. “Darwinism” is the claim that this change is driven by the purposeless, meaningless, undirected, natural process of “Natural Selection” (Survival of the Fittest). I find the scientific evidence for this philosophical assertion unconvincing and indeed, I am far from alone in this. So the question as is not whether or not “Biological Evolution” occurs, but rather - What is the cause of this “Evolution.” Is it a purposeless, natural cause or is there an intelligence guiding this evolution?

Harry Truman was right, “History is bunk.” The more I learn the more undeniably true this statement becomes. Most “history” consists of claims crafted into a media template that fills some political or philosophical agenda. The picture that emerges is usually substantially at odds with the facts. There are few places where this has been truer than the case of Charles Darwin and the legacy of Darwinism.

Darwin’s apologists have been busy ever since the 1860’s fabricating this template. For example racism is no longer popular. Racists are today seen as evil people. Consequently, “Saint Darwin” could not possibly be a racist. Thus the title of Darwin’s most famous book has been progressively sanitized. The volume which today goes by the title “The Origin of the Species” was originally titled “On the Origin of the Species by Means of Natural Selection or The Preservation of Favored Races in the Struggle for Survival.”

First, the secondary title of the book “The Preservation of Favored Races in the Struggle for Survival” was dropped. It is widely recognized though rarely admitted by scholars that Darwin’s book was initially most warmly embraced by racists of every stripe. English colonialists, slave owners, sweat shop owners, monarchists and all types of racial supremacists agreed that Darwin had indeed proven why they were superior and it was only natural that they should be at the top of the social hierarchy. Indeed Marx used it to justify European colonialism and Hitler and the Nazi’s used it as the reason for “Aryan supremacy.”

Next “by Means of Natural Selection” was dropped or down played since it has been accepted by the Neo-Darwinists that natural selection alone indeed cannot explain the origin of species. But that is another matter too vast to discuss here.

But now the Darwinists are being confronted with what may be the biggest challenge they have ever faced, the evidence that Darwin’s greatest ideas weren’t even his but were stolen from his grandfather and Alfred Wallace. In a new book called “The Darwin Conspiracy” Roy Davies (himself a former Darwin apologist) makes a detailed and compelling case showing that Darwin actually stole his major ideas from Alfred Wallace.

While the media often traces Darwin’s “discovery of natural selection” to an “ah ah” moment while observing finches in the Galapagos Islands, Darwin scholars have long recognized that their is no evidence to support this claim. His notes of the time record no awareness of this mechanism. It was not until Alfred Wallace sent Darwin a letter in 1858 describing Natural Selection that Darwin claimed that he had discovered it twenty years before but had just never gotten around to publishing it. (Some of his apologists would later claim that his “reluctance to publish” was for fear of persecution by Christians).

Davies book meticulously reviews the documents involved and makes a compelling case that Darwin in fact plagiarized Wallace’s ideas. Given the differential in their social status and connections Wallace agreed to co-publish the theory (half a loaf is better then none), which up until the 1950’s, commonly was attributed to both of them but from which Wallace’s name has been recently dropped. As it turns out Wallace had to be dropped, as his other writings are an embarrassment to Darwinists because Wallace exhibited a strong tendency toward acceptance of the idea that the evolution and natural selection observed in nature were working within some sort of Divine plan.

A joke among Chinese paleontologists is that, “In the US you can criticize the government, but you can’t criticize Darwin, in China it is the other way around”.

If Indiana Jones discovered a 55 Chevy buried in the undisturbed tomb of an Egyptian pharaoh even he would be surprised. However Darwinists are unimpressed by an even more amazing discovery of something even further out of its place in time.

On May 29, 2008 scientists at the Victoria Museum in Melbourne, Australia reported finding the fossilized remains of the oldest vertebrate, placental animal ever discovered. The creature was a beautifully preserved placoderm (armored, jawed) fish found in a fossil bed in Northwestern Australia known as the Gogo Formation. What made this fossil so spectacular was that inside of this female fish was a tiny baby placoderm fish still attached to its mother by an umbilical chord. Until now the oldest known viviparous (animals that give birth to live young) vertebrate ever discovered was from the Jurassic period dating to about 180 million years ago. However this placoderm fish dates to at least the middle Devonian dating about 380 million years ago. Because the process appears to be in its fully developed form, it does not seem unreasonable to believe that viviparous birth in vertebrates probably dates back to at least the middle Silurian epoch to about 420 million years ago when placoderm fish first appear in the fossil record.

Viviparous insects are believed to exist from this period. However they are far more primitive than these fish, do not have umbilical cords and are clearly unrelated to them as any type of ancestral form. Scorpions for example hatch their eggs inside of the mothers and then release the live young. The placental birth process is extremely complicated. It requires many specialized organs and behavior. It also requires highly developed complex sexual organs, copulation, mating behavior and much more.

Here is what is so stunning about this find: the Cambrian period when true multi-cellular animals first appear in the fossil record only ends about 500 million years ago. These very advanced placoderms are in the fossil record only about 120 million years later and they appear suddenly, out of nowhere and fully developed. According to Darwinism they should have been developing gradually over long periods of time and should only appear much later in the fossil record. So there should have been lots of simpler intermediate forms in the fossil record not the fully developed form that was discovered at this stunningly early time.

Why This Is Important

The Darwinists while expressing surprise are just embracing this discovery as nothing truly stunning or creating a need to reexamine their assumptions about how evolution is supposed to work as an unguided, accidental process. Their conclusion will be that fully developed viviparous birth simply randomly developed earlier than expected. This is the equivalent of Indiana Jones concluding that there it was no big deal in finding a 55 Chevy in the tomb of a pharaoh. His conclusion being that the 55 Chevy was first built in 2500 BC instead of 1955 - no big deal - just revise the numbers and go on as before.

The real importance of this fossil is that it is another of a growing list of examples of highly advanced biological processes that appear far too early in the fossil record to be honestly explained as the result of an unguided random process.

Further Source: “The Oldest Pregnant Mum”, by Carina Dennis, Nature, 453, 575 (2008).

By: Lawrence Vescera, Ph.D.

On May 19th the British House of Commons passed the new Human Fertilization and Embryology Bill. It is the first nation to pass legislation of this type but almost certainly will not be the last. This bill marks the crossing of a Rubicon for humanity, the consequences of which no one can even begin to foresee. It opens a ghastly panorama of science fiction nightmares that are not likely to ever be exceeded in the future of the human race.

The bill allows the creation of four types of embryos for new organisms which are all part human and part animal. They are:

Cybrids - These will be creatures with animal cells replaced with a human nucleus. These will allow epigenetic effects to operate on the human nucleus.

Chimeras - These are organisms that are made of a mixture of human and animal cells. On September 7, 2007 in “Human Animal Hybrids Have Been Created” this Blog reported the creation of Sheep Chimera that had a human liver.

Transgenic Embryos - These will be creatures with a small amount of human or animal DNA mixed with the opposite member. This is done in genetic engineering such as taking genes from one plant and placing them in a different plant. Science fiction writers have often envisioned creations such as humans with chloroplasts, who do not need to eat because they turn sunlight into food directly.

True Hybrids - These are the most disturbing of all. In these procedures human eggs or sperm will be fertilized by their animal counter part thereby creating an organism that is 50% human and 50% animal. The Nazis tried this unsuccessfully during WWII when they tried to impregnate Jewish women with ape sperm. They hoped to create the perfect slave laborer. Where the Nazis failed perhaps the others will succeed?

Some temporary solace can be taken from the fact that these monsters from “Frankenstein science” as the Catholic Cardinal of Scotland called these embryos, will not legally be allowed to live past 14 days. However one wonders what will be the fate of a half human that is allowed to live “illegally” past 14 days? What if its creator simply forgets to kill it at 14 days?

The reason given for the creation of these partially human entities is their alleged value as research tools in medicine and basic biology. While there are serious scientific questions about their value for these purposes, all types of marvelous
cures for terrible diseases such as Alzheimer’s are postulated. It is on the basis of such claims as this research may lead to breakthroughs in treating human diseases that the pressure to allow this ghoulish exploration is generated.

Why This Is Important

Even if the serious moral questions surrounding these experiments are ignored, there is still plenty of danger here. Soon pressure will come to allow these organisms to go full term and be born. The Pandora’s Box of problems that will follow probably cannot even be dimly imagined today. It does not require much of a stretch of the imagination to see people crossing cells from their pets, that they love dearly, with cells from their recently dead spouse or lover and creating for example a half dog/half man. It might look like one and have the brain of the other. Imagine the possibilities of what its “owner” might do with that?

Source: “MP’s Back Creation of Human - Animal Embryos”, by Mark Henderson and Francis Elliott, www.timesonline.co.uk. May 19, 2008.

By: Lawrence Vescera Ph.D.

In broad outline the Book of Genesis gives the following information about early human history:

1. All humans are descended from one woman and one man. (Genesis: 2)

2. Humans originated in an area close to or in the Tigris-Euphrates Valley. (Genesis 2) The early human population grew to a considerable size (Genesis: 5)

3. At some point early in human history the entire world population was almost wiped out by a catastrophic event. (Genesis: 6)

4. The world was repopulated by the survivors of this catastrophe. (Genesis: 10)

This narrative has found support in recent research published in “The American Journal of Human Genetics.” Please keep in mind that this article has nothing to say about the relevance of this research to the above scriptural passages. The conclusions of this research as stated are completely secular. However there are Biblical implications in this research.

The study examined the mtDNA (mitochondrial DNA) of the Khoi and San people, they are two groups of hunter and gathers living in southern Africa. These two bands are considered “…unique relics of the hunting and gathering life style.” Their genetic material represents a pocket of reproductively isolated genes with ancient roots. The analysis of their genetic material is quite complex and convoluted so no detail is included here, if you are interested, the original article is referenced below. However the findings of the researchers were shocking to some and are fascinating to review.

First this work reminds the reader that mitochondrial DNA research supports the idea that we are all descended from one woman. For those interested, there are also Y Chromosomal studies that show that we are all descended from one man. Sound familiar? (Adam & Eve)

Second, in addition to showing lines of descent and the approximate time that these lines diverged from their ancestral line, such studies can also point to the original geographical dispersion patterns of populations of organisms. The current dominant theory among paleoanthropologists is that humans first appeared in Northeast Africa somewhere around the Rift Valley. This area is only about 1,000 miles from the Tigris-Euphrates Valley. Given the imprecision of such studies, the actual focal point of human origins could easily have been anywhere within the East African/Middle Eastern region which includes the Tigris-Euphrates Valley. Again does this ring a bell? (Garden of Eden)

Third, this and other cited studies concluded that the human race underwent a catastrophic near extinction about 70,000 years ago. A related piece of research done by a group from Stanford University concluded that the world population may have collapsed to as little as 2,000 individuals. It is argued that this catastrophic population implosion was “probably” caused by a drought. However the study does not postulate a world wide drought, so it is difficult to see how a drought would have caused a world wide population decline? However this event would fit very nicely with the expectations of what would follow a world wide hydrological catastrophe as described in Genesis 6. (Noah’s Flood)

Fourth, the study points to the fact that all existing humans are the descendants of the survivors of this catastrophe. Again, does this sound familiar? (Genesis 10)

Why This Is Important

This research while probably not intended to have Biblical implications in its broad brush strokes, paints a picture of the early history of the human race that is consistent with the Biblical narrative. Some may take exception to the details of the research but its general outline certainly has a ring of familiarity to it.

Sources:

1. “Humans Nearly Wiped Out 70,000 Years Ago”, April 24,2008,www.cnn.com/2008/TECH/24/close.call.ap/index.html

2. “The Dawn of Human Matralinial Diversity”, in The American Journal of Human Genetics, by Doron Behar, et.al., April 24, 2008.

By: Lawrence Vescera, Ph.D.

You may be a “Thought Criminal” and not know it. So, if you have not yet seen “Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed”, I strongly suggest that you see it. Ben Stein produced this movie to alert the public to some very disturbing trends. The movie exposes a widespread effort in academia and the media to suppress the fact that a growing number of mainline scientists are beginning to consider Intelligent Design as an explanatory factor in their work or world view.

Intelligent Design is probably most often defined as the argument that the origin of the Universe and the origin of life cannot be completely explained by purely natural, random or unguided processes alone. This leads to the argument that at some point supernatural intervention was required to either start the process or to intervene in it. This supernatural force is usually identified as God. The movie shows what happened to some scientists and teachers who dared to openly consider Intelligent Design. They very quickly found themselves purged from the field, loosing their positions, abilities to publish, reputations and more.

This movie attempts to tackle an enormously large set of subjects. Adequately addressing such a large body of information in two hours is nearly impossible. A twenty-four part series would be inadequate to cover issues that include: science definitions, science history, biology, evolution, Darwinism, Social Darwinism, freedom of speech, freedom of thought, academic freedom and much more. But Stein did a good job of providing an overview and introduction to this battle that is being waged against scientists and scholars who want to consider Intelligent Design.

The film recounts what happened to several researchers who dared to write about scientific research findings that support the Intelligent Design argument. These people have paid dearly career-wise for openly thinking about Intelligent Design.
Keep in mind that in most cases they were not advocating it, but only discussing it. Their crime can best be described as a “thought crime.” Such crimes in the 20th Century generally occurred in the Marxist countries where such crimes were covertly and occasionally openly punished. In Marxist regimes anyone who dared question the Neo-Marxian worldview usually found themselves without a job and home and in some cases imprisoned, like Alexander Soljenitzen, and occasionally as under Stalin or Mao execution was also a real possibility.

The film also discusses some of the problems with Social Darwinism and its consequences. It briefly reviews the undeniable link between Darwinism and the Eugenics Movement and their use by regimes such as the Nazi’s with their theories about survival of the fittest between competing races and how this was directly linked to the Holocaust.

Not surprisingly the film has infuriated the Darwinists. The film is being attacked on all sides. The factual accuracy of the film is usually not attacked directly because many of the facts are undeniable so they speak for themselves. Therefore the criticisms have mostly fallen into marginal areas such as claims that the film does not tell the other side of the argument completely enough or that there are copyright issues about the use of some animations (it is hard to imagine a more irrelevant criticism).

Arguably the films most important point is that the effort to squelch discussion of Intelligent Design is an infringement of freedom of speech and thought. Whether or not Intelligent Design is factually correct is not the main issue for many, the main issue is freedom of thought. The Darwinists, materialists and atheists want to straight-jacket us all, having us put on blinders to the evidence that points to God’s creative role in the Universe by saying that Intelligent Design is not science. However at the same time they contradict themselves by also claiming that the scientific evidence against Intelligent Design is “irrefutable.” If this is the case, why are they trying to suppress free discussion of the subject? The truth is only too
obvious; they know that their beliefs are based on extremely weak evidence and in all probability will collapse under future scrutiny. However Darwinism is the basis for moral relativism and moral relativism is the foundation of the political left. Therefore there is no length these people will not be willing to go to in order to enforce their ideological orthodoxy.

By: Lawrence Vescera, Ph.D.

Imagine your surprise if you suddenly discovered that the person you thought was your grandfather was actually born more recently then your father.  Well, that is exactly the position that Darwinists are in, given new genetic studies of sponges and jellyfish.

Sponges are very simple, “primitive” life forms. They lack true tissues, having no muscles, internal organs or nervous systems.  They even lack a digestive system.  They resemble something like a colony of independent cells.  They have long been regarded as representing a first step in the evolutionary transition from single-celled organisms to the first multi-celled organisms. Comb jellyfish on the other hand are more advanced, complex organisms having such innovations as internal organs including a nervous system.

According to the Darwinian model of the “Tree of Life,” all life forms are descended from a single-celled ancestor which evolved through time by exclusively random, natural, accidental process into ever more complex multi-cellular organisms.  This model is a hierarchy, which requires that simple life forms must come first and give rise gradually to more complex life forms. Consequently, primitive organisms like sponges must evolve before more complex organisms like jellyfish can be “naturally selected” into existence.

So, imagine the surprise a group of scientists using powerful new genetic research tools had when they discovered that their data showed that comb jellyfish diverged onto their own evolutionary path before sponges. “This was a complete shocker. . . So shocking that we thought something had gone very wrong,” said Casey Dunn, the team’s lead researcher from the University of Hawaii. But despite checking and rechecking the data still pointed to the same conclusion – the more complex animal predated the simpler animal.

Despite this “shocking” finding in contradiction to the predictions of the Darwinian model, the Darwinian model was not brought into question.  After all, these scientists want to keep their jobs and one does not question Darwin in academia (an alleged bastion of unfettered “free thought”).  Consequently, two highly improbable alternative explanations were offered in an attempt to bludgeon the data back into the constraints of Darwin’s 1859 insights.  The suggested solutions are that either sponges devolved from a heretofore completely unknown, more complex ancestor or the comb jellyfish evolved their complexity independently after they went off onto their own evolutionary branch of the Tree of Life.

Why this is Important

This study raises three critical problems only one of which is even addressed by the authors.  The first problem is the fact that the higher form of life is more ancient than the lower form.  The evidentially unsupported speculations mentioned above that are offered to account for this are weak at best and will likely not find support by further research.  The second finding that is even more important is the undressed time factor.  The fossil record shows that jellyfish appeared suddenly in the fossil record.  The third problem is where are their ancestors in the fossil record? If jellyfish didn’t evolve from the sponges where did these complex creatures come from? In terms of the Darwinian model the evolution of organs such as a nervous system would have taken at least ten’s of millions of years.  So where are the original and intermediary forms?

This is not the first case where genetic research has collided with Darwinism.  Genetic research has been making it harder and harder to maintain the Darwinian straight jacket that claims that life appeared and evolved without any divine or intelligent intervention.

Sources:

“Broad Phylogenomic Sampling Improves Resolution of the Tree of Life”, Casey Dunn et. al., Nature, April 10, 2008 pp 745-749.

“The First Animal on Earth Was Significantly More Complex The Previously Believed”, Science Daily, April 11, 2008.

By Lawrence Vescera Ph. D.

“Meteorites Delivered The ‘Seeds’ Of Earth’s Left-handed Life, Experts Argue”, read the headline in this Science Daily story of April 7, 2008. This claim was quickly advertised around the world by the media as a major breakthrough in the effort to explain the origin of life on Earth by purely natural, unguided processes. However, what the headline claimed and what the story actually reported are two far different things. This story is a classic example of how the media mis-informs and dis-informs the public on issues of great import. It is also an example of the widespread misuse of science and scholarly research to promote the materialist/humanist agenda.

Here is how the media operates this abuse: first they make a bold claim such as that in the above story. They then report the details in the story, realizing that few will read beyond the headline and knowing that even if they do, very few will understand what is being written at a level necessary to evaluate the claim in the headline and accurately conclude that the headline’s claim is so weakly supported by the data that the story is not really worth reporting. Also when competent scientists criticize the story, if reported at all, will be printed on page 36 under a headline such as “Scientist Question Chirality Claim.” A title, which will guarantee that almost no one will read it.

Let us examine the above story to see this pattern at work. The opening paragraphs tell an imaginative tale of the early Earth:

“Flashback three or four billion years – Earth is a hot, dry and lifeless place. All is still. Without warning, a meteorite slams into the desert plains at over 10,000 miles per hour. With it this violent collision may have planted the seeds of life on Earth.” “Scientists have presented evidence that desert heat, a little water and meteorite impacts may have been enough to cook up the first prerequisites of life: The dominance of “left-handed” amino acids, the building blocks of life on this planet.”

The story claims to answer one of the greatest mysteries in biology, known as the “chirality problem.” Chirality here refers to the molecular mirror image symmetry of proteins. This symmetry is labeled as either left or right-handedness depending on how amino acid molecules polarize light. This is a very complex problem, which cannot be discussed here in detail, but in summary is as follows: With a few exceptions almost all of the amino acids in living systems are left-handed. However, in the inorganic world, amino acids because of the physics of their formation process are always found in mixtures of equal parts of left and right-handed forms. These amino acids are the raw material from which proteins are constructed. If protein synthesis occurs in a mixture of left and right-handed amino acids, even if the right-handed molecules constitute only a tiny fraction of the whole, the molecules formed will be biologically useless because they will fold in a manner that causes them to be inactive. Consequently when life was first synthesized on Earth it was necessary to start in environment of pure left-handed only amino acids.

Getting and maintaining a solution of purely left amino acids even under laboratory conditions is extremely difficult. This means finding a natural route to the synthesis of purely left-handed amino acids in the very messy natural world, full of right-handed amino acids, contaminants and thermodynamic problems seems almost insurmountable. Consequently origin of life researchers have long despaired over finding a materialist explanation for this phenomenon.

The article in question claims to provide a solution to this problem. According to this article: researchers examining the amino acids on the surface of some meteorites from Australia and Tennessee found a 5% to 10% excess of left-handed molecules over right- handed molecules. They then postulate that if this is combined with a series of natural processes (not currently known to exist), which could purify and amplify left-handed molecules, this concentration level can be increased to higher levels and (add another mere 100,000 or so other critical steps) you “voila” get life.

The article does not mention several interesting facts. First researchers have been examing meteorites for years looking for evidence of this chiral excess. Up until now all have always found that meteorites contain equal amounts of left and right-handed molecules. Ancient rocks in the Earth’s crust also always show this same racemic mixture. Would anyone like to bet that this finding will not be replicated when preformed at different labs using different meteorites? The fact that the excess of left-handed amino acids comes from the surface and not the interior of the meteorites should raise a big red flag because the surface is where contaminants from Earth life are likely to be found. Also not mentioned is the fact that even if there is a slight abundance of left-handed amino acids in meteors and a natural process did amplify this concentration (of which there is currently absolutely no evidence) it would still not provide the purely left-handed solutions of amino acids which is necessary for life to start from. In a mind-boggling step of illogic, the process of amplification postulated in this article requires preexisting biological organisms to carry out the process of amplification. So the way life originates under this scenario is through the mediation of preexisting life.

Why This Is Important

This piece of extremely questionable research will now begin to work its way into the public forum. It will become used as evidence to support the claim that “life originated through strictly natural processes.” It will probably become common knowledge that “meteorites brought left-handed amino acids to Earth and these formed the basis of life.” The reality however is that this common knowledge will be based on a greatly overstated case standing on the shakiest of evidence. This is reminiscent of that fact that many people now believe that there is genetic evidence to support the claim that homosexuality is genetically based. Such claims are based on several pieces bogus research, which were touted with extravagant headlines in the media. This research was all later shown to be specious, yet it is not unusual today to be told, “Everybody knows that scientists have shown that homosexuality is genetic.”

Source: www.eurekalert.org “Meteorites Deliver The ‘Seeds’ Of Earth’s Left-hand Life”, AAAS, April 6, 2008.

By: Lawrence Vescera Ph.D. - Isaac Newton Institute

This July will see a unique event in the history of modern thought. It may very well prove the beginning of a true “Paradigm Shift” in biology. The Event has been labeled the “Woodstock of Evolution” and will probably mark the beginning of the end of the status of Darwin’s writings as holy writ and Darwinism’s strangle hold on freedom of thought and speech. This meeting will be attended by sixteen of the world’s leading evolutionary biologists and philosophers of science. It will take place in Altenberg, Austria at the Konrad Lorenz Institute. The reason for the meeting is the recognition by most of these scholars that Darwinism is retarding progress in biology through its insistence that biological evolution can only occur through natural selection operating on random processes.

Thought in the nineteenth century was dominated by three main figures Marx, Freud and Darwin. Freudianism has fallen into disrepute through repeated experiments showing that it does not work and in reality can be harmful to psychiatric patients. Indeed in most of its controlled tests the patients in the untreated control groups almost always do better than the patients receiving “psychoanalysis.” Marxism has also been rejected almost everywhere except on university campuses because the people living under Marxist governments eventually get tired of being poor while their neighbors prosper. Darwinism, however, has not died yet, because it is foundational to materialist philosophy, the cornerstone of which is cultural relativism, with its claim that there is no absolute right or wrong. Right and wrong to cultural relativists are just matters of taste not revelations from God.

Unfortunately, devotion to Darwinian orthodoxy also had the unintended consequence of stopping scientific progress in biology. Despite its failures, biologists were reluctant to consider the possibility of any mechanism, even other materialist mechanisms, as possible drivers of evolution. The rarely admitted reason for this strict enforcement of thought policing was the fear that any admission that Darwin could have been wrong might bring down the entire materialist edifice. However reality eventually will force the admission that the emperor has no clothes and that is where biology finds itself today. It has become painfully obvious that Darwinism, despite its claims, cannot explain “the origin of species” satisfactorily and when it comes to questions such as the origin of life, Darwinists have completely abandoned the effort, admitting that it is hopeless within their paradigm.

This is why the meeting in Altenberg is taking place. It is hoped that this meeting will find a new way forward in biology. This new way forward will be called the “Extended Evolutionary Synthesis.” However this new synthesis will not be a victory for the recognition of a role for God in the creation and evolution of life such as proposed by Intelligent Design. It will instead be an effort to rescue materialism by finding new naturalistic explanations for the origin and development of life. The areas that will be looked to are theories of self organization such as Chaos Theory, a Fourth Law of Thermodynamics, the Butterfly Effect and similar theories that exclude God from consideration.

Why This Is Important

Despite the fact that only materialist theories for evolution will be acceptable explanations in the Extended Evolutionary Synthesis, it probably will still a be giant leap forward because it will undermine Darwinian orthodoxy in all areas of science, philosophy and social policy. Once Darwinism is more widely recognized as too restrictive for biologists it will also begin to decline in popularity in the social sciences and with this decline as orthodoxy new explanations will be looked at. What will be the most interesting of all will be to see what happens with the new theories of self organization. As anyone who has followed this literature knows, theories of self organization have been widely discussed for over forty years and despite repeated claims of breakthroughs they have so far proven a total failure to explain biological evolution. As these theories continue to prove fruitless in the future, it will be interesting to see what straw the materialists will grasp at next?

Source:” Mazur: Altenberg! The Woodstock of Evolution” by Suzan Mazur, March 4, 2008, www.scoop.co.nz/stories .

By: Lawrence Vescera, Ph.D.

Channel One is an advertisement based educational television network that is currently broadcast into more then 11,000 schools in the United States. In exchange for having students watch their programming and commercials, the schools receive the programming and viewing equipment such as TV monitors and VCRs for free.

Channel One has regularly run stories critical of Intelligent Design and supportive of Darwinism. The stories contained many inaccuracies, misrepresentations, errors of fact, and misleading material. These inaccuracies include using the term evolution to mean Darwinism and using the term Intelligent Design as if it included only Young Earth Creationism. This was done in an effort to portray Intelligent Design in the worst light possible. They tried their best to paint the proponents of Intelligent Design as enemies of science, truth, and fact. They conversely tried to present Darwinists in the most positive light possible, portraying them as beacons of reason, intelligence, truth, beauty, virtue, and the American Way. They stopped short of claiming that Darwinists could leap tall buildings in a single bound.

Recently, Channel One ran a poll in their “Your Turn” section under the title “Evolution or Design” to explore the reaction of the students to whom they have been broadcasting their propaganda. On February 15th an online survey of almost 1500 high school students was conducted to test the effectiveness of their crusade for Darwinism. The students were given the choice of four options regarding what should be allowed in the teaching of origins. The results must have astounded the Darwinist advocates at Channel One. The results are below.

High School Students Only
1. Evolution Only - 9%
2. Intelligent Design Only - 53%
3. Evolution and Intelligent Design - 25%
4. None of These - 13%

The poll remains open to the general public now, and as of today the results from all respondents, not just high school students, are below.

All Respondents as of 3/1/08
1. Evolution Only - 19%
2. Intelligent Design Only - 44%
3. Evolution and Intelligent Design - 24%
4. None of These - 13%

Why This is Important

Despite the enormous efforts of the media, Hollywood, and the rest of the Materialist/Darwinist Complex, they are failing miserably to convince the public that life is the result of a random, purposeless, and exclusively natural process. It is especially interesting that high school students reject the Darwinist Paradigm by an even wider majority then the public in general.

Those who are trying to get the message out that there is a God and that life has meaning and purpose should take heart from these results.

Source:
ChannelOne.com

By: Lawrence Vescera Ph. D., Isaac Newton Institute

In 1943, C.S. Lewis published “The Abolition of Man.” In it, he warned against using science to debunk natural law and objective values to the detriment of the understanding of what constitutes humanity. It is doubtful that Lewis envisioned that “man” as an objectively definable entity could cease to exist within the next sixty-five years, but that is indeed what is about to happen.

British researchers at the University of Newcastle-upon-Tyne have announced the development of a technique to turn female bone marrow cells (mesenchymal cells) into sperm cells. A similar technique is also expected to allow male marrow cells to be turned into egg cells. Therefore, women will soon be able to produce sperm, and men will be able to produce eggs. The projected uses of the technique are to enable infertile couples to produce children, but its most startling effect will be to allow same-sex couples to produce children that are biologically their own. In the near future, there will be children that are not born of a woman and a man. There will be children of two fathers or of two mothers.

This is no small matter. Think about this carefully. What will the status be of these entities? Are they true human beings? They will certainly appear to be fully human in every way, but what is a human being? Historically and biologically, humans have always been the offspring of a father and a mother. These beings will be persons who will either have no mother or no father. Where will this go in the future? Cloning is possible now. Even more troubling, human genes have begun to be introduced into animal and plant reproductive germ lines, and animal and plant genes will likely soon be introduced into the human germ line. Consequently, “enlightened scientists unencumbered by religious prejudices” will endeavor to produce more completely hybridized humans, finally succeeding where the Nazi’s earlier efforts had failed by producing half ape, half human creatures.

Why This Is Important.

The physical consequences of this new technology probably will be small compared to the spiritual, psychological, social, and emotional consequences. What will it mean to be human? As this technology expands, the very concept of humanity will expand and be progressively eroded and diluted until it becomes as ill defined as the modern concepts of beauty and justice. What the fruit of this abolition of man will be is extremely difficult to predict; nonetheless, it seems probable that it will not be good. Knowing the proclivities of humanity, the extinction of “human beings,” in historical terms, is a virtual certainty.

Source:
1. “Death of the Father: British Scientists Discover How to Turn Bone Marrow into Sperm,” By Feona Macrae, Daily Mail, January 31, 2008.

By: Lawrence Vescera Ph.D., Isaac Newton Institute