Intelligence is a very difficult concept to define let alone reproduce.  We know it when we see it, even in animals but what it is exactly has eluded philosophers and scientists for millennia?  Human intelligence is the biggest mystery of all?  How is it that humans are capable of advanced mathematics, Quantum Physics or memorizing Pi to 22,500 places? Even the infinitely malleable Darwinian explanation, which can bludgeon anything into the Natural Selection straight jacket, which simultaneously explains everything and nothing, is no longer taken seriously as the explanation for the rise of human intelligence by a growing cohort within the field of Cognitive Sciences.

Artificial intelligence is an attempt to reproduce this undefinable quality of “intelligence” in machines.  In 1958 Walter Cronkite narrated a “Twentieth Century” television documentary about computers and artificial intelligence.  Computer technology was in its early stages and capabilities were limited but the program assured the audience that “intelligent computers” capable of thought were just around the corner and within a few years would be part of everyday life and that thinking machines would soon be relieving humans of all sorts of mundane tasks.  In 1968 Stanley Kubrick’s “2001 A Space Odyssey” included the character “HAL 9000,” a sentient computer which was not only capable of thought; HAL even became afflicted with mental illness caused by moral qualms.  In 1969 an IBM hardware engineering executive assured me that IBM could “build HAL today” if the government would just put up the money.  Such claims have continued to be made regularly for the past fifty years and the field of Artificial Intelligence (AI) has developed from the efforts to actually build these thinking machines.  Unfortunately despite high hopes and almost daily predictions of breakthroughs AI seems even more distant now than it did in 1958.  In the 1960’s it was concluded that progress in AI was not being made because the “right questions” were not being asked.  In the 1980’s it was concluded that “the right questions were not being asked because the questions were not being framed properly.”  In the 1990’s until now it is acknowledged that we do not even know how to frame the questions, let alone ask the right questions.

As a former enthusiast of AI, the vision I had of the future filled with intelligent machines in no way matches today’s reality.  Instead of the highly intelligent Star Ship Enterprise type computers that relieved the ships crew of loads of tiresome chores,  I find that computers have instead loaded us with more tiresome chores.  For example clerical work:  for many years I had secretaries that did my typing, filing, phone answering and much more work that I must now do for myself because computers make it possible.  The work once done by bank tellers, the banks are now trying hard to force the customer to do for themselves.  Even the grocery stores are trying to force patrons to be their own checkers and box boys.  This doesn’t even include the deluge of email we all deal with daily.

However this rather lack luster reality has not dulled continued predictions of a rosy future filled with smart machines doing all sorts of wonderful things. The reason for this continued optimism about the creation of thinking machines comes from the belief by theorists in the field that intelligence is a “computational” activity.  This line of reasoning is simple - computers can compute therefore computers should be able to think.  The Materialist philosophy behind this AI assumption is that intelligence is just a by product of the brain’s chemistry and physics: therefore intelligence should be reproducible in machines.  Unfortunately years of failure and dead ends in AI are now leading some in the field to question these Reductionist, Materialist beliefs about intelligence. Intelligence seems to be more then just brain chemistry and physics. But what is it?

If intelligence is not a matter of brain physics and chemistry, it then must originate in a non-material realm.  This of course is arguably Plato’s greatest conjecture, that consciousness and intellect originates in the mind of God and we in effect “think God’s thoughts after Him” to quote Albert Einstein.  This of course is not difficult for Christians and Jews to accept because it is totally consistent with our beliefs. 

 Contributing Source: “The Revolution Will Not Be Roboticised” by Nic Fleming, NewScientist, August 29, 2009, pp 28-29.

The current claimed view of the human fetus in the “Pro-Choice” community is that a fetus is simply a ball of tissue and aborting it is no different from removing a wart. This view of course is rejected by the Pro-Life community. However, this dehumanized view of the fetus held by the Pro-Choice community is facing a growing problem from fetal research studies. About 10 years ago it was discovered that the human fetus feels pain. Until recently surgeries preformed in utero did not anesthetize the fetus because it was believed that they did not experience pain, however fetal brain wave studies have clearly shown that the human fetus does experience pain during surgical procedures. While this should give us all pause when considering what the fetus must experience during an abortion: the Pro-Choice community succeeded in defeating efforts to require fetal anaesthesia during abortions. The barbaric cruelty of this to my mind is almost unimaginable.

Now a study done at the University of Maastricht in Holland has shown that the 30 week old fetus appears to have at least short to medium term memory and the ability to learn. These studies show that the fetus can recall memories even 4 weeks later. For years many hypnotherapists have claimed evidence for long term memories in utero going back long before 30 weeks.

Pain, learning, brain wave activity and now memory in the human fetus all strongly point to the fact that the fetus is not just a simple ball of cells but is a sentient being.

Source: Child Development, “Aspects of Fetal Learning and Memory”, by Chantal Dirix et. al., Issue 4, vol 80, pp 1251 -1258.

A number of people asked for the references cited in the discussion that followed viewing the movie Expelled on February 27 Th. at Christ Lutheran Church in Costa Mesa, CA. Here they are in no particular order:

1. “Mathematical Challenges to the Neo-Darwinian Interpretation of Evolution”, Edited by Paul Moorhead and Martin Kaplan, The Wistar Institute Symposium Monograph No. 5., 1967

2. “A Case Against Accident and Self-Organization”, Dean Overman, Rowman and Littlefield, Oxford, 2001.

3. “In the Beginning Information”, Werner Gitt, Master Books, 2006.

4. “A Tour of the Calculus” David Berlinski, Vintage Books, New York, 1995.

5. “The Mystery of Life’s Origin” Charles Thaxton, Walter Bradley and Roger Olsen, Lewis and Stanley, Dallas, TX, 1992.

1. Biblical Reliability (Archeology)

Israel Finkelstein is the medias favorite archaeologist. He has earned this position through his tireless efforts to discredit the Bible. He is widely regarded as the world’s leading Biblical Minimalist. Minimalists can generally be described as “scholars” who assert that the Bible is nothing more than a collection of myths and political propaganda written centuries after the time period they claim to report. Despite the fact that dozens of Finkelstein’s claims have been shown by subsequent archaeological work to be wrong, the media still maintains him as their leading Biblical archaeological expert.

Among Finkelstein’s many assertions is the claim that the Edomite nation was a latter day creation of the Bible. The Bible records that Edomites were the descendants of Esau, Jacob’s twin brother, and that Edom was a dedicated enemy of early Israel. In all, Edom is mentioned 99 times in the Bible. However Finkelstein in his book “The Bible Unearthed” states that, “Edom did not exist as a distinct political entity until a relatively late period….there were no real kings and no state of Edom before the late Eighth Century BCE.” According to him the Bible’s record of Edom existing during and before the time of David in the Tenth Century BC is pure fiction.

Unfortunately for Finkelstein he has once again been shown to be wrong. The March- April edition of “Archeology” reports the discovery of an Edomite copper processing center in operation in the Tenth Century BC. The “industrial” level of production of copper in Edom at this early date carries with it large implications. “This means that there was a complex society in the area, known then as Edom, when scholars thought it was unoccupied.” Once again the Bible has proven reliable and a critic is left with egg on his face. One can only hope that at some point Finkelstein and the Minimalists will begin to lose credibility with the media.

2. Materialism’s Failure (Cognitive Studies)

Some Materialists have argued that people are born a blank slate upon which environment writes the personality, ergo, no free will. Therefore we are not responsible for our behavior because we have all been shaped by the environments we were raised in. Other Materialists argue that we are completely programmed genetically; therefore we have no free will and once again are not responsible for our actions. So the media treats the public to a stream of scientific claims which demonstrate one or the other, never bothering to note that these two causal agents are mutually exclusive.

In this vein the February issue of the “New Scientist” carried a major article entitled “Natural Born Believers”. The article notes that religious beliefs, as with language and music are a human universal, occurring in every culture on Earth. Studies are cited that demonstrate that children are born with an ability to conceive of God and are strongly pron to attribute design and purpose to the objects that constitute the world. They refer to this behavior as the brain’s inherent “Default to God”.

This finding should be no surprise to Christians. The Bible for example, tells us in Romans 2:15 “since they show that the requirements of the law are written on their hearts, their consciences also bearing witness…” A knowledge of God and morality being part of our natural born programing is no surprise. It seems to me that it is arguable that this discovery is strong evidence that humans are indeed the creation of a benevolent God.

However the authors of this article do not see God’s hand in this, they instead argue that this natural inborn belief in God must have originated through a random evolutionary process as a biological adaptation. They postulate an adaptive advantage for this natural tendency to believe in God.

Of course critics have pointed out that the appearance of any biological trait can be claimed to have had an adaptive advantage for some hypothetical ancient band of ancestors. Conveniently, such speculative claims are beyond scientific investigation. On a personal note I’d be curious to know how genetics could explain the fact that I personally was a strident, committed, orthodox, Marxist atheist until I was in my mid 30’s. Then with in the span of a couple of years became a committed Christian? What myriad of genetic adaptive advantages explains this phenomenon?

1. Setting the Record Straight - Islam Did not Save Western Science (Revisionist History)

Revisionist historians are working diligently at their task of creating an alternative history: one which suits their ideological and emotional fancies but does not always comport well with the record. For example, in recent years it has become a common place for revisionist historians and especially journalists to state that “Western science is deeply in debt to Islam.” They usually go on to claim that if it were not for the medieval Islamic scholars, the works of Aristotle, Plato and other great Greek Philosophers would have been lost to the modern world. Anthony Pagden’s new book “Worlds At War” is a good example of such claims.

The actual truth of the matter was much better explored by Nineteenth Century Historians such as the great Ernest Renan. Renan clearly showed that with the exception of Averrois all of the major “Islamic scholarly contributions” came from Last Remnant of Christian Persians who were either “converts” from Christianity or scholars raised in areas where there was a strong recent Christian history and a Christian ethos still persisted. (Who knows what a convert to Islam may actually be? It has often proved to simply be people at sword point who wanted to live.) And even in the case of Averrois working in Spain in the 1100’s, his works were later declared heretical by Islamists and ordered destroyed. They only survived because they had been translated into Latin and Hebrew by Jewish and Christian Scholars, actually reversing the direction of salvaging scholarly thought as claimed by modern revisionists.
Also the assertion that the works of the ancient Greeks only survived because of Arabic translations is an enormous distortion. It is true that some of the major works of Aristotle, such as the Organon had been translated into Latin but were lost in Western Roman lands during the “Dark Ages.” However, they were never lost in Greek translations in the Eastern Roman Empire (Byzantium). It was from these sources that the Arabs learned about Aristotle and Plato not the other way around. It is true that Western Scholars in some instances were first reintroduced to Plato and Aristotle by reading Arab translations of the Greek but the claim of revisionists that these works were “saved” by Islamic Scholars is simply not an accurate portrayal of what happened.

2. Shocking Contradictions Go Unrecognized by Darwinists (Darwinism Failure)

“Darwin Was Wrong: Cutting down the tree of life” read the cover of the January 24, 2009 issue of “The New Scientist.” Just one week later the cover of “National Geographic” read “What Darwin Didn’t Know.” While neither story is a repudiation of Darwinism they instead reveal the level of confusion and contradiction that Darwinists have learned to live with and pretend or some how manage not to notice.

For example the main thrust of the story in the “New Scientist” is that modern genetics has destroyed the Darwinist contention that all of the life forms on Earth are descended from one single original organism. “…the tree of life which Darwin used as an organizing principle and which has been a central tenant of biology ever since. Most biologists now accept that the tree is not a fact of nature - it is something we impose on nature…” However the “National Geographic” story is still pushing Darwin’s Tree of Life. It reports that, “When Darwin proposed his tree of life he was frankly guessing.” They however claim that modern genetic studies have proven Darwin’s descent from one common ancestor. “-modern Darwin’s don’t have to guess. They consult genetic scripture.”

The author of this article is correct about modern Biologists consulting genetics but unfortunately for this author that consultation of “genetic scripture” has shown that Darwin was wrong, not right. Perhaps what this author should have titled this “National Geographic” article “What I Don’t Know.”

3. The “Father” of anthropogenic Global Warming “Embarrassed NASA” (Misuse of Science)

James Hansen is widely regarded as the man who first sounded the “alarm on global warming.” Hansen is the Chief Climate Scientist at the NASA Goddard Institute of Space Studies. Hansen has made some of the most outlandish claims about the consequences of his alleged “man caused global warming.” Besides being Al Gores main science consultant on this issue he has also led the fight to silence critics and stifle discussion of alternative interpretations of the data. Over time Hansen has also been found to have fudge data, use the wrong data, misuse climate models and generally ignore or actively tried to suppress counter data. However none of this has tarnished is reputation with the “objective”,”main stream” media.

Now in a January 27, 2009 post on the Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works website, Hansen’s former boss at NASA, Dr. John Theon, has openly broken with him, stating that Hansen had “Embarrassed NASA” with his claims about global warming. Theon was Chief of several NASA Headquarters Programs including Hansen’s and was responsible for all NASA weather and climate research. Theon now says that the claims of man caused global warming are not supported by the data and that the models being used to project climate catastrophe are flawed. “Thus there is no rational justification for using climate model forecasts to determine public policy.”

Hansen also claimed that the “Bush Administration was trying to muzzle him.” Theon points out that this is absolutely not true. First of all NASA has a policy against making forecasts of mans effect on climate change because the science for it is not yet good enough to do this. However despite this policy and despite the fact that the current science is not up to the task Hansen still gave over 1400 interviews on the topic while he worked for NASA and was never sanctioned for this massive violation of agency policy.

1. Reliability of Scripture - (Archeology)

Source - “Newly Discovered: A Fortified City From King David’s Time,” Biblical Archeology Review, Jan/Feb 2009 Vol. 35 No. 1 pp 38-43.

One of the most hotly contested issues of Biblical archeology is the transition between the periods known as Iron Age I and Iron Age IIa. In Biblical chronology this is the transition between the time of the Judges and the Monarchy and is dated to approximately 1000 BC. The Bible’s description of the early Israelite Monarchy under Kings David and Solomon is one of a prosperous, strong, medium sized, centralized state with a sophisticated government and sizable cities and towns.

However Biblical Minimalists have argued that contrary to what the Bible reports: Israel was really just a group of tribes living in the Judean highlands and David and Solomon (if they actually ever existed) were nothing more then a couple of local Tribal Chiefs. While recent archaeological discoveries have forced the Minimalists to abandon questioning the reality of David and Solomon’s existence, many additional discoveries are also forcing them to continue to retrench other assertions.

For example, recent excavations on a hill top site known as Khirbet Qeiyafa which overlooks the Elah Valley of David and Goliath fame (1 Samuel 17) have revealed a city dated to Iron Age IIa. Among other distinctives of an advanced urban culture, the site revealed a well-planned, fortified city whose center was surrounded by a 2200 foot long 13 foot wide wall, made of stone blocks weighing up to 5 tons each. It is believed that this is the city of Gov (mentioned to in 1 Samuel 17:52). Referring to the Minimalist argument, Biblical Archeology reports that, “Qeiyafa upsets this theory in spades” further Yossi Garfinkel the lead Archaeologist stated “The new excavations clearly indicate that already in the time of King David, urban cities were constructed in Judah.”

2. Materialism’s Failure (Consciousness Research - Mind Over Matter On A Grand Scale)

“The GCP Event Experiment: Design, Analytical Methods, Results,” Journal of Science Exploration, 22: 309, 2008.

If Materialism explains consciousness, then phenomena such as psychokinesis should not exist. If mind is nothing more then a set of physio-chemical reactions, then it should not be able to effect matter. Consequently mind over matter is a concept scoffed at by true Materialists. But are they correct? It appears not.

In a recent experiment conducted by the Princeton based Global Consciousness Project (GCP) a result was produced that should startle Materialists. The GCP attempted to see if “Periods of collective emotional or attentive behavior in a widely distributed population will correlate with deviations from expectations in a global network of Random Number Generators?” So, to test this hypothesis the GCP set up a global network of Random Number Generators (RNG) to see if their output was altered during times of emotional stress in large segments of the world population. The stressors included assassinations, bombings, natural disasters and other events which typically attract a lot of attention.

The experiment was run and to the surprise of some the results showed that when one of these stress events occurred, the random number generators were effected. The numbers they generated tended to deviate from the normal expectation of randomness. The GCP actually found a positive correlation between these large scale emotional stressors and the output of the RNGs.

This result should give Materialists pause for their narrow reductionist view of reality.

3. Beyond Darwinism - (Biology, Evolution)

“Charles Darwin’s Tree of Life is ‘Wrong and Misleading’, Claim Scientists” Telegraph.co.uk 1/23/09

Darwin’s Theory of Evolution rests upon two main mechanisms: unguided natural selection and unguided descent with modification. Christian theologians’ main problem with both of these concepts is the inclusion of the word “unguided”. Biological evolution with Natural Selection as the driver is coming under increasing criticism but that will not be dealt with here.

Darwin depicted “Descent With Modification” as a “Tree Of Life.” On this tree simple one- celled organisms gradually give rise to more complex organisms over time, eventually leading to fish, amphibians, reptiles, mammals and humans. The morphological record based on fossils seemed to roughly correspond to this chain of descent. However modern genetics, despite loud claims to the contrary, has not supported this model of evolution very well at all. In recent times some Evolutionary Biologists have even begun referring to the “Bush of Life” of the “Lawn of Life” instead of the “Tree of Life.”

Dissenting from Darwinism has been a risky business and few Biologists have been willing to gamble their careers and openly dare to criticize the Darwinian Tree of Life. However the evidence against it has become so unequivocal that some mainline, well-placed Biologists are beginning to state the obvious. This article in the Telegraph recounts some of this new honesty, quoting among others Dr. Eric Bapteste of Curie University in Paris, “Far a long time the Holy Grail was to build a tree of Life. We have no evidence that the tree is a reality.”

1. Freedom of Thought & Speech – (Politics, Misuse of Science)

Source - “Mr. Gore: Apology Accepted” – Huffington Post 1/13/09

Main Points – Al Gore’s simple correlation between atmospheric CO2 levels and temperature are very misleading and incorrect. First CO2 only absorbs Earth’s infrared emissions within a certain spectral band width. The CO2 in the atmosphere is currently absorbing almost all of the infrared emissions it can, given its absorption spectrum. Consequently higher level of CO2 will not result in substantially greater amounts of infrared (heat) being retained. (It is often overlooked that the current CO2 level in the atmosphere is 380 parts per million –however at times in Earths past it has been as high as 7500 parts per million). The IPCC is aware this and in order to explain the facts away it has now postulated an as yet undetected (and unknown historically) feedback mechanism between CO2 and water vapor which it claims may raise temperatures.

2. Beyond Darwinism – (Biology, Origin of Life, Evolution)

Source - “Embryonic Stem Cell Research Update” – Faith and Culture – EWTN TV 12/07/08

Main Points – Embryonic stem cell research (ESR) has two main branches – Reproductive and Therapeutic. Therapeutic ESR focuses on finding cures for diseases while Reproductive ESR (also known as cloning) focuses on making living copies of a parent. Therapeutic ESR has so far been a total bust. However, there are currently over 60 therapies available that were derived from using adult stem cells, 0 have come from ESR. Cloning of animals has met with limited success for unknown reasons. Only about 1 in every 200 attempts meets with any success.

There has been stiff resistance to expanding human ESR because it requires destroying a fetus in order to get live stem cells. Human cloning has been prohibited in almost every nation because of its repulsive moral implications. However the human cloners are now changing their tactics. They are arguing that it will be necessary to first clone humans before ESR can produce successful therapies - a dubious claim at best.

3. Setting the Record Straight – (History, Economics, Moral Issues)

Source - “Blind Spot” by Paul Marshall – New York Times (NYT) not sure Islamic Terrorists are Actually Targeting Jews

Main Points – The Media either through ignorance or willful denial have enormous blind spots. This has led to absurd statements such as the NYT surprise that the recent terrorist attacks in Mumbai, India included a Jewish Center and their speculation that, “it may have only been accidental” that the hostages taken and murdered included Jews. Similar unbelievably silly and patently false media assertions include the insistence that Islamic terror is the result of “oppression or economics.”

In May of 2008 the British House of Commons passed a new version of its Human Fertilization and Embryology Bill. Under this new set of rules scientists working in Britain are allowed to produce embryos that are part human and part animal. Many were troubled by this possibility and expressed concern, especially about where this might lead in the future. The press of course proceeded to try to paint anyone who questioned the wisdom of such research as backward, ignorant, anti-science bigots.

Sadly these sorts of experiments are nothing new. They had been tried before, however the technology to produce human - animal hybrids had not been sufficiently developed and these experiments failed. The best known of these experiments were carried out by the Nazis. They made a number of efforts to cross apes with Jewish concentration camp victums. One of the goals of such experiments was to prove that Jews were in fact racially inferior. The theory being that, if Darwin was right and all life forms had descended through a chain of ancestors in hierarchical fashion, it would be easier to hybridize a Jew with a lower life form such as an ape because Jews were lower on the “Tree of Life” than other humans. Fortunately it is not necessary to review this disgusting, unimaginably cruel “work” here.

However the Nazis were not the only ones to attempt to cross humans and apes. When many Soviet archives were opened in the 1990’s, new light was thrown on the little known Soviet attempts to hybridize humans and animals. The most famous of these was the work of Ilia Ivanov, a biologist who specialized in hybridization. In the 1920’s Ivanov began going to Africa to collect great apes. These animals were brought back to Russia and experiments were planned to try to produce half human - half apes. At least five women actually volunteered to be inseminated with primate sperm but alas, it was not to be. After several unsuccessful experiments, the program was eventually terminated for a variety of reasons including the untimely death of “Tarzan” the orangutan who was supposed to be the prime sperm donor for the volunteers.

Here is where the spin comes in: these experiments were originally embraced by the world’s Darwinists, however Darwin’s apologists are now trying to cover up what Ivanov was really trying to prove with these experiments. The original proposal to the Soviet Academy of Sciences survives and it gives Ivanov’s reasons as to why the Soviet state should finance his experiments. The primary reason given was to prove that Darwin was correct and that humans had evolved from apes. If a human could be hybridized with an ape, it would provide powerful evidence that we were closely related biologically. It went further and stated that this would strike a blow against religion and provide the Soviets with a powerful propaganda tool. Not surprisingly The American Association for the Advancement of Atheism conducted fund raising on behalf of the project.

Arguably this leaves no doubt as to what Ivanov was out to prove. However no amount of fact dissuades Darwinists from their opinions. Despite the undisputably clear records, Ivanov’s “real motives” are considered a “mystery,” by some. This is a mystery that no doubt requires the efforts of a academic “Inspector Clouseau” to solve. So in the most recent issue of “Studies in the History of Philosophy and Science, Part C” can be found the “real reasons” for Ivanov’s experiments, and low and behold, Darwinism had almost nothing to do with it. It seems that the very absence of evidence points to the inescapable conclusion that the Politburo members were actually out to create the perfect “Socialist Man”. Ivanov’s work was in reality an experiment in “Positive Eugenics.” Given Soviet history perhaps a human - horse hybrid might have been closer to the perfect “Socialist Man” then a human - ape hybrid.

The history of Darwinism is one of ugliness and cruelty. And regrettably the ugliest and cruelest chapters probably have yet to be written.

Source:

“Beyond Eugenics: the forgotten scandal of hybridizing humans and apes”, Studies in History of Philosophy and Science, Part C: Studies in the History and Philosophy of Biological and Biomedical Sciences, vol 39, Issue 2, pp 205-210.

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.