In response to the column “Evolution: theory not fact” in Feb. 7’s edition of Technician.

Instead of name calling and unsubstantiated comments, I offer some insightful quotes from Evolutionary Scientists who should know their own discipline. Those people who chose to bury their head in the sand regarding the truth that modern science has shown us in the just the last 20 years need to reconsider their positions regarding the legitimacy of this theory of evolution.

In light of the quotes below, one can only suppose an agenda for continuing to promote Darwinism which, in reality, has nothing to do with real scientific inquiry.

“Our willingness to accept scientific claims that are against common sense is the key to an understanding of the real struggle between science and the supernatural. We take the side of science in spite of the patent absurdity of some of its constructs, in spite of its failure to fulfill many of its extravagant promises of health and life, in spite of the tolerance of the scientific community for unsubstantiated just-so stories, because we have a prior commitment, a commitment to materialism. It is not that the methods and institutions of science somehow compel us to accept a material explanation of the phenomenal world, but, on the contrary, that we are forced by our a priori adherence to material causes to create an apparatus of investigation and a set of concepts that produce material explanations, no matter how counter-intuitive, no matter how mystifying to the uninitiated. Moreover, that materialism is absolute, for we cannot allow a Divine Foot in the door.” – Lewontin , Richard C. [Professor of Zoology and Biology, Harvard University],

– Prof. Michael Ruse, key speaker at the annual Conference of the American Association for the Advancement of Science (1993), was supposed to refute the creationist book, “Darwin on Trial” by Phillip Johnson (Berkley law professor). Instead, he shocked his colleagues by endorsing one of PJ’s main points, that Darwinian theory is based as much on “philosophical assumptions” as on scientific evidence: “I’m no less of an evolutionist now than I ever was…. For many evolutionists, evolution has functioned as something with elements which are, let us say, akin to being a secular religion.” He cited other leading Darwinists , including Julian Huxley, to back his “secular religion” comparison.

– T.L. Moor, paleontologist: “The more one studies paleontology, the more certain one becomes that evolution is based on faith alone.” (cited in “Origins?,” BG Ranganathan , p. 22)

– John T. Bonner: “We [evolutionists] have been telling our students for years not to accept any statement on its face value but to examine the evidence, and therefore it is rather a shock to discover that we have failed to follow our own sound advice.” (cited in “The Twilight of Evolution,” Henry M. Morris, p. 91)

– Miles Eldredge , paleontologist: “We paleontologists have said that the history of life supports [gradual adaptive change], all the while really knowing that it does not.” (cited in “Darwin on Trial,” Phillip Johnson, p. 59)

– Mary Leakey , paleoanthropologist : “All these trees of life with their branches of our ancestors, that’s a lot of nonsense.” (from an interview with Associated Press, Dec 10 1996)

– H. Lipson , physicist: “In fact, evolution became in a sense a scientific religion; almost all scientists have accepted it and many are prepared to ‘bend’ their observations to fit in with it…. To my mind, the theory does not stand up at all… I know that [considering creation theory] is anathema to physicists, as indeed it is to me, but we must not reject a theory that we do not like if the experimental evidence supports it.” (“A Physicist Looks at Evolution,” “Physics Bulletin,” 1980, p. 138)

– T. Rosazak: “The irony is devastating. The main purpose of Darwinism was to drive every last trace of an incredible God from biology. But the theory replaces God with an even more incredible deity: omnipotent chance.” (“Unfinished Animal,” p. 101)

– Charles Darwin: “I am quite conscious that my speculations run quite beyond the bounds of true science.” (from a letter to Asa Gray, Harvard biology professor, cited in “Charles Darwin and the Problem of Creation,” N.C. Gillespie, p.2)

– Pierre-Paul Grasse, past President of the French Academie des Sciences, Editor of the 35-volume “Traite de Zoologie:” “Today [1977] our duty is to destroy the myth of evolution, considered as a simple, understood and explained phenomenon which keeps rapidly unfolding before us. Biologists must be encouraged to think about the weaknesses and extrapolations that theoreticians put forward or lay down as established truths. The deceit is sometimes unconscious, but not always, since some people, owing to their sectarianism, purposely overlook reality and refuse to acknowledge the inadequacies and falsity of their beliefs.”

– Bounoure, past Director of Research at the National Center of Scientific Research, France: “Evolutionism is a fairy tale for grownups. This theory has helped nothing in the progress of science. It is useless.” (“Le Monde Et La Vie,” Oct 1963)

– Art Battson, professor, University of CA – Berkley: “We must bear in mind that just because neo-Darwinian evolution is the most plausible naturalistic explanation of origins, we should not assume that it is necessarily true…. In retrospect, it seems as though Darwinists have been less concerned with the scientific question of accurately explaining the empirical data of natural history, and more concerned with the religious or philosophical question of explaining the design found in nature without a designer. Darwin’s general theory of evolution may, in the final analysis, be little more than an unwarranted extrapolation from microevolution based more upon philosophy than fact. The problem is that Darwinism continues to distort natural science.” (“Facts, Fossils, and Philosophy,” 17 May 1997)

– G.A. Kerkut, biochemistry professor at the University of Southampton: “The philosophy of evolution is based upon assumptions that cannot be scientifically verified… Whatever evidence can be assembled for evolution is both limited and circumstantial in nature.” (cited in “Biology,” Keith Graham et al, p. 363)

– Roger Lewin: “It is in fact a common fantasy, promulgated mostly by the scientific profession itself, that in the search for objective truth, data dictate conclusions. Data are just as often molded to fit preferred conclusions.” (“Bones of Contention,” p. 68)

– Arthur Keith: “Evolution is unproved and unprovable. We believe it only because the only alternative is special creation which is unthinkable.” (cited in “Origins?,” BG Ranganathan, p. 22)

– W.R. Thompson, Introduction to “Origin of the Species” by Darwin: “This situation, where men rally to the defense of a doctrine they are unable to define scientifically, much less demonstrate with scientific rigor, attempting to maintain its credit with the public by the suppression of criticism and the elimination of difficulties, is abnormal and undesirable in science…. I am not satisfied that Darwin proved his point or that his influence in scientific and public thinking has been beneficial.”

– Francis Crick, Nobel Prize recipient for discovery of DNA structure: “Every time I write a paper on the origin of life, I determine I will never write another one, because there is too much speculation running after too few facts.” (“Life Itself,” p. 153)

– John Ambrose Fleming, President British Assoc. for Advancement of Science: “Evolution is baseless and quite incredible.” (“The Unleashing of Evolutionary Thought”)

– Dr. Colin Patterson, paleontologist at the British Museum of Natural History: “The explanatory value of the hypothesis of common ancestry is nil… I feel that the effects of the hypotheses of common ancestry in systematics has not been merely boring, not just a lack of knowledge, I think it has been positively anti-knowledge… Well, we’re back to the question I’ve been putting to people: ‘Is there one thing you can tell me about evolution?’ The absence of answers seems to suggest that it is true: evolution does not convey any knowledge, or if so, I haven’t yet heard it.” (from speech at the American Museum of Natural History, NYC, Nov 5, 1981)

– Louis Agassiz, Harvard professor, pioneer in glaciation: “The theory of evolution is a scientific mistake.” (cited in H. Enoch, “Evolution or Creation,” p. 139)

– S. Lovtrup, professor of zoophysiology at Universityof Umea, Sweden: “I have already shown that the arguments advanced by the early champions [of Darwinian theory of natural selection] were not very compelling, and that there are now [1987] considerable numbers of empirical facts which do not fit with the theory. Hence, to all intents and purposes the theory has been falsified, so why has it not been abandoned?” (“Darwinism: The Refutation of a Myth” p. 352)