Feb 17, Dion is currently reading it. Some interesting facts and ways of looking at things. Blake rated it liked it May 16, Becca Thompson rated it liked it Jan 05, Jeff rated it really liked it Mar 30, Patrick Campbell rated it liked it Jun 07, Fern rated it really liked it Oct 01, Dylan Jones rated it really liked it Dec 28, Kim Frank rated it it was ok Oct 25, Meyer rated it liked it Feb 29, Deborah Laux rated it it was amazing Feb 16, Tim Hayes rated it really liked it Mar 17, Christy Lockstein rated it really liked it Feb 11, Geri marked it as to-read Jul 11, David Bazett-jones marked it as to-read May 27, Julia added it Oct 16, Awisaka marked it as to-read Oct 27, Darroll Wright marked it as to-read Aug 16, Ashley marked it as to-read Sep 04, Sandra added it Aug 29, Keith Vincent marked it as to-read Jan 01, Simeon Labuschagne marked it as to-read Aug 18, And of course he knew nothing about the origin of atoms, a problem not solved until the s, over a century after his death.
Shot through with errors and inconsistencies; nonsense, the lot of it! Darwin was ignorant of transitional fossils, and in words still quoted by creationists deplored their absence as the greatest objection to his theory. He was equally ignorant about the origin of biological novelty, which comes from mutating genes. And because he did not realise that inheritance occurred through genes, he could not explain why favourable variations were not simply diluted out.
It would be decades after his death before we could even speculate coherently about the origins of life, and despite tantalising clues it remains a largely unsolved problem.
If such a student accepts that the evidence points towards evolution, and understands why, then any religiously motivated inner reservations are a matter for the student, not for you. But back to Darwin. Why is discussion of evolution still saturated with his name? By identifying evolution with Darwin, they continue to breathe life into the controversies of the mid th century.
A friendly discussion …. To be fair, Darnton does not pretend that he is writing anything other than fiction, although surely he was writing with half an eye on the creationist market. To further test my idea, I went online to Amazon. Here are some of the books by creationists that I came up with; a lot of the names were all too familiar, but I never realized that Rick Santorum had actually got his name on a book. The most recent entry December is one I heard about through the Discovery Institute, who also published it.
Nelson, ; this fraudulently misnamed creationist pseudo-texbook is discussed further here on the Briths Centre for Science Education website. The Edge of Evolution: The Search for the Limits of Darwinism Michael Behe, ; since Behe clearly believes that biological complexity is the work of a designer who operates independently of natural laws, I include him as a creationist, although he would deny this. Darwin Day In America: Reclaiming Science from Darwinism: Darwinism Under The Microscope: Wiester and Janet Moneymaker, Johnson and Denis O.
Lamoureux, Lamoureux says no, by the way. No legitimate fossil evidence exists that shows one species changing into another. In the Minds of Men: Creation Moments is pleased to bring you what has been hailed as the classic work on the creation-evolution issue!
And so on, all the way back to The Refutation of Darwinism: This version is an expansion of what appeared on 3 Quarks Daily, 6 Feb Popper repeatedly made clear his acceptance of the historical fact of evolution; for a full discussion see here. Reblogged this on Peddling and Scaling God and Darwin and commented: Like Liked by 1 person. So many familiar books, and especially note the obsession ID has on the subject!
IMO a lot of new editions are completely unnecessary, driven by the fact that otherwise the market dries up because students sell their books on. There is absolutely no scientific support for the monkey-to-man scenario—absolutely none. On the contrary, science, and even philosophy, validate the title of this book and its overriding message as stated a few pages ago.
Sign up to receive the WORD up! weekly newsletter
Either-Or If there is an alternative answer to the totally unscientific view that monkeys slowly turned into people, ostensibly it is one of the religious variety. But before we tackle the idea, let me first share the concept I find continually bubbling up from the origins cauldron: So grab a writing instrument and check your choice of one of two for each of the ten statements below. The most violent accidental explosion ever, the big bang, was sufficiently self-appointed to create the largest and most fine-tuned object ever known, the universe.
The sheer number of planets in the universe, and the number of years these planets have existed, give us a mathematical chance that at least one would become a fully interactive biological world—ours—by accident.
Exposing Darwinism's Weakest Link - Kenneth Poppe - Google Книги
A half billion years ago, in the blink of an evolutionary eye, the Cambrian explosion self-generated the completely interactive gene pool of all 32 animal phyla with complex organ systems. After the Cambrian explosion, random scramblings of genetic information kept producing improved genetic codes. This allowed life to surge forward as animals kept giving rise to improved offspring with which, suddenly or eventually, they could not mate.
These accidental genetic surges adequately explain a whole host of large-scale advances— for example, straight bones in fins turning into jointed bones in legs, reptile scales turning into bird feathers, photosensitive cells turning into eyes, births from amniotic eggs turning into births from a placenta, and chordates like cows or hippos going back into the ocean to become whales.
While animals randomly surged forward within 32 phyla from sponges to mammals, plants accomplished a similar advance in complexity from moss to cacti, but did it in only 8 steps, often called divisions instead of phyla. And central to this book: Primates like monkeys left the trees and kept getting bigger, stronger, and smarter. About 5 million years of natural selection was sufficient time for hominids to adapt to walking on their hind legs, learn to use tools, fashion clothes to wear, master fire, develop first spoken and then written communication, and finally organize societies in cave homes among maple groves that eventually became cottage homes on Maple Street.
So how did you score on this checklist? Therefore, if you find evolution insufficient in even one instance , you need to consider a bigger-than-science connection— unless, of course, you want to remain apathetic. And yet if monkeys are not our uncles then how do you explain human origin? How do you explain the master plan of God the Designer?
- Jesus is the ONLY way!.
- Exploring Science, Explaining Evolution, Exposing Creationism.
- Through the Keyhole!
- Account Options.
- Even on his birthday, don’t say Darwin unless you mean it (updated) | Primate's Progress.
- About Paul Braterman.
Posted by Stacey at Evolution , Kenneth Poppe , non-fiction. Newer Post Older Post Home. Jesus is the ONLY way! Ask forgiveness, ask Him to be Lord of your life, and say thank you for what He's done.