Evolutionary Theory Is a ‘Series of Folktales’: Renowned Academic Grills ‘Incoherent’ Modern Science
By: Will Maule
This is a great article. The subject of it makes some great points. The pseudoscience of evolution is being exposed for the intellectual fraud that it is.
S E E D E D C O N T E N T
Modern scientists have force-fed the theory of evolution on Americans for decades, leaving the impression it is settled science. But that is hardly the case, as many brilliant minds have criticized and questioned the theory, including David Berlinski, a self-described “secular Jew.”
Berlinski is an author, academic and a world-renowned expert on the history of science and the philosophy of mathematics. A Senior Fellow of the Discovery Institute’s Center for Science and Culture, he is also a notable critic of evolution, arguing that the popular Darwinian theory is not only void of scientific proof but also incapable of explaining the innate worth and value of human beings.
The credibility of evolution, he says, should be fundamentally questioned at every turn as in the case of any other prominent theory.
“You’ve got evolutionary biologists who say things like, ‘evolution is as assured as the law of gravity,’ but you never hear a physicist saying ‘the theory of gravity is as assured as evolution. Why is that?” Berlinski asked Ben Shapiro in a recent interview at the Daily Wire.
“Well, in a nutshell, my suggestion is that, by the standards of the serious sciences — mathematics and physics (including special and general relativity, quantum mechanics, quantum field theory) — there is simply no point of comparison.”
Berlinski called evolution “vague, incoherent, unarticulated, imprecise” and a theory that “doesn’t exist in any rigorous form.”
Evolutionary theory is a “series of folktales” that “doesn’t answer any deep questions,” he added.
When it comes to the deepest question of all — the origin of life — despite classing himself as a “secular Jew,” Berlinski admitted that Intelligent Design theory “certainly should have a seat at the table.”
Intelligent Design posits that the defining features of the universe and of life on earth are aptly explained by a higher being of infinite intelligence. It is, therefore, a view held by many Bible-believing Christians, who assert that this intelligent being is, in fact, the Christian God.
Indeed, the Seattle-based think thank at which Berlinski is a fellow, the Discovery Institute’s Center for Science and Culture, is a major proponent of intelligent design as a legitimate theory through which the creation of the universe can be explained.
Intelligent Design is a “serious idea” that “at first blush seems to confront the facts successfully,” Berlinski admitted. “Biological structures do appear as if they were not only intelligently designed but brilliantly designed.. you take a look at any biological system and the level of complexity is so daunting as to be indescribable.”
As biological complexity pertains to the theory of evolution, Berlinski highlighted that Oxford University was opening up a new institute “for the Mathematical Study of Evolutionary Dynamics.”
“It begins with the admission that they don’t have a mathematical theory of evolutionary dynamics, “Berlinski explained. “150 years after Darwin, that seems to me a striking admission.”
He continued: “These are the kind of anecdotes you come across in evolutionary thinking again and again: ‘the theory is perfect, it’s irrefragable, it can’t be corrected, it’s a summit of human achievement, but we’re gonna go right back to the beginning and see if we can make it better.'”
“How come you guys didn’t think of that 100 years ago?” Berlinski laughed. “If it doesn’t exist yet, how can you say the theory is as good as general relativity?”
The academic also touched on the vast influence that evolutionary theory has garnered across our education systems and global media.
“You must remember that evolutionary thought is supported by an immense and powerful lobby. It’s not only a scientific agenda, but it’s a political agenda,” he said. “He who controls education in terms of evolutionary theory has a very powerful advantage.”
Berlinski added that he was shocked by how the “evolutionary biologists have co-opted the media worldwide into acting as an extended propaganda arm for Darwinian theory.”
Additionally, the mathematician argued that evolutionary theory simply cannot explain the essential features of human nature, such as the inexplicable capacity to love one another.
The author went on to suggest that the idea that “reproductive success” alone can explain the “panorama of human moral decisions, emotional decisions and commitments” is “abysmally primitive.”
“The full grandeur of human life is certainly far bigger, far greater, far more significant in scope than anything that can be explained in terms of the vagrant male desire to [have sex],” Berlinski implored.
He also urged that it was “a great mistake to overlook original sin,” as a core tenet of human nature.
“Dr. [Samuel] Johnson was asked for a defense of the doctrine of original sin by his biographer, and he said ‘concerning original sin, the inquiry is not necessary because men are so avowedly and confessedly corrupt, that all the laws of heaven and earth are unable to prevent them from the commission of their crimes,'” Berlinski recited.
“I think that’s something that should be remembered, especially for anyone paying attention to the 20th century.”
Berlinksi was also keen to assess the ways in which evolution has been harnessed and hijacked by some of history’s most evil men — including Hitler himself.
“Don’t forget, the Nazi’s were great admirers of evolutionary theory,” he explained. “They adapted it to their own purposes, but there was a clear connecting link between what Darwin was saying in the 19th century and what Himmler was declaring in the 20th century.”
“[The Nazi’s] believed in evolution very sincerely, they just happened to believe that evolution culminated in the master race.”
“What gave the Nazi’s that sense of entitlement that they were allowed to exterminate other people?” Berlinski asked. “They never said it was a whim. They said they needed to kill the Jews because they are parasitical of the body politic…the imperatives of a purified biology demand their elimination. That’s what they said.”
Berlinski added that those ideas were present in German thinking for decades prior to the rise of Naziism — it was a relentless evolution of evil that culminated in the cruel genocide of millions that would not have stopped with at the elimination of the Jewish race. “First, they got rid of the mentally ill, the infirm, the crippled, then they went onto the Jews and they would have kept going on. They were going to continue with the Slavs, and then when they were finished with the Slavs, the SS wanted to start on the Germans,” Berlinski said.
Of the Nazi desire for a biologically superior race, Berlinski noted that “the German people themselves” would have been whittled down through a process of elimination by desirable biological characteristics.
“At the end of the process, only the SS would remain,” he said. “That was the real goal of the Nazi state.”
Tags
Who is online
80 visitors
Darwinian theory is not only void of scientific proof but also incapable of explaining the innate worth and value of human beings.
The credibility of evolution, he says, should be fundamentally questioned at every turn as in the case of any other prominent theory.
“You’ve got evolutionary biologists who say things like, ‘evolution is as assured as the law of gravity,’ but you never hear a physicist saying ‘the theory of gravity is as assured as evolution. Why is that?” Berlinski asked Ben Shapiro in a recent interview at the Daily Wire.
“Well, in a nutshell, my suggestion is that, by the standards of the serious sciences — mathematics and physics (including special and general relativity, quantum mechanics, quantum field theory) — there is simply no point of comparison.”
Berlinski called evolution “vague, incoherent, unarticulated, imprecise” and a theory that “doesn’t exist in any rigorous form.”
Evolutionary theory is a “series of folktales” that “doesn’t answer any deep questions,” he added.
When it comes to the deepest question of all — the origin of life — despite classing himself as a “secular Jew,” Berlinski admitted that Intelligent Design theory “certainly should have a seat at the table.”
Intelligent Design posits that the defining features of the universe and of life on earth are aptly explained by a higher being of infinite intelligence. It is, therefore, a view held by many Bible-believing Christians, who assert that this intelligent being is, in fact, the Christian God.
Indeed, the Seattle-based think thank at which Berlinski is a fellow, the Discovery Institute’s Center for Science and Culture, is a major proponent of intelligent design as a legitimate theory through which the creation of the universe can be explained.
First let me wish you and your family a happy thanksgiving weekend
but really...
Everyone should question religion as “vague, incoherent, unarticulated, imprecise” and a theory that “doesn’t exist in any rigorous form.” Religious theory is a “series of folktales” that “doesn’t answer any deep questions,” I might add.
There, now it makes sense.
So you think that belief in the so called theory of evolution pseudoscience requires as much faith a a Christian would place in our belief in God?
There is no faith required to accept evolution as the best explanation we have for speciation and our origins. The evidence is overwhelming. It is multidisciplinary evidence for a theory that has not only survived for over 150 years but is now so thoroughly tested that there is no scientific question that it is correct. The focus on science is not on whether or not life is the product of evolution, but rather on the details of how evolution has shaped all life on the planet.
Denying evolution at this stage is staggering. Even the Catholic church has acknowledge the validity of the science since the 1950s.
Apparently you have never taken my suggestion to check out the biologos.org website to see what Christians who are scientists have to say about evolution . Dr. Francis Collins, in particular, is a highly distinguished scientist with deep roots in the human genome and co-founder of biologos.
If you are not going to even consider to what fellow Christians have to say on this topic then that strikes me as confirmation bias writ large. A perfect recipe for ignorance (and that is not an advisable state for anyone).
First, evolution is not pseudoscience, second all sciences require logic and discipline, like the discipline to believe your eyes
when your religion says to close them to logic and facts that that don't fit their narrative.
The deity behind the Christian religion s the source of all intelligence, wisdom, knowledge, honesty, intellect, and everything else in the universe.
Pure and utter nonsense.
People were intelligent long before Christianity was an annoyance to Judaism.
People had mapped the stars, built stone henges to mark the solstices,
figured out complex math and engineering to build pyramids worldwide to worship much older deities.
Every year more archeological digs push the envelope back beyond 10,000 years.
Fossils of a variety of critters date back millions of years.
Berlinksi was also keen to assess the ways in which evolution has been harnessed and hijacked by some of history’s most evil men — including Hitler himself.
“Don’t forget, the Nazi’s were great admirers of evolutionary theory,” he explained. “They adapted it to their own purposes, but there was a clear connecting link between what Darwin was saying in the 19th century and what Himmler was declaring in the 20th century.”
“[The Nazi’s] believed in evolution very sincerely, they just happened to believe that evolution culminated in the master race.”
“What gave the Nazi’s that sense of entitlement that they were allowed to exterminate other people?” Berlinski asked. “They never said it was a whim. They said they needed to kill the Jews because they are parasitical of the body politic…the imperatives of a purified biology demand their elimination. That’s what they said.”
Berlinski added that those ideas were present in German thinking for decades prior to the rise of Naziism — it was a relentless evolution of evil that culminated in the cruel genocide of millions that would not have stopped with at the elimination of the Jewish race. “First, they got rid of the mentally ill, the infirm, the crippled, then they went onto the Jews and they would have kept going on. They were going to continue with the Slavs, and then when they were finished with the Slavs, the SS wanted to start on the Germans,” Berlinski said.
Of the Nazi desire for a biologically superior race, Berlinski noted that “the German people themselves” would have been whittled down through a process of elimination by desirable biological characteristics.
Scientific theories require no belief. Only evidence. There's a big difference.
That's nice. Prove it! Affirmative claims require evidence, not mere belief or empty claims.
Your argument is that if an evil person in history abuses or tries to abuse a discipline of science then the discipline itself is in some way wrong?
Certainly you must realize that all technology (and that includes medicine and medical science) available today is built upon the foundation of science. So do you really think it makes sense to argue that if a technology is abused by someone the underlying disciplines are wrong??
Rather than engage in such a silly grasping at straws one is better served learning about the subject matter so that one can intelligently formulate an argument based on facts and reason.
Some people are not interested in learning anything that conflicts with their own beliefs and/or biases. Certainly not in any facts and reasoning.
Human intelligence and logic as we have it pales into insignificance compared to an all knowing all powerful eternal creator God that exists in realms we can’t really comprehend. It is the height of arrogance to put God in a box and suggest we know what he can and can’t do.
More useless cut & paste verbiage from the seeded propaganda?
No original thoughts or comments?
Really?
I suppose I should not be surprised but I always expect more, sad.
There there are no facts or reason for random chance devolution. Feel free to continue to believe that you are the finest evolutionary sample of humanity from ooze to whatever to whatever to ape to you if you wish. I won’t stand in your way. I’ll continue to believe that I’m a child of God, a fallen and sinful descendant of the original creation in His image.
I think you should go commune with a wild horse or a wolf.
They knew our souls and potential
several hundred thousand yeas ago.
Long before we were speaking and writing,
the other animals recognized us as their potential doom.
Prove that I borrowed the words from the seed instead of my own belief oh great moderator in the sky.
Because God gave humanity dominion over the rest of creation and then when we lost dominion to Satan He places a fear of man in the other animals for our own protection.
And over time humans have proven again and again that we are actually the barbarian animals.
Evolution and devolution are very different things. And evolution is not random chance; it is a process of variations moderated by the environment. And it is not something one believes, it is something one accepts based on knowledge of the subject matter.
But that is what you and other evangelicals do, day in and day out. You all constantly proselytize that you speak for God and know what God thinks. You're constantly telling others this horse shit.
Give it a rest, it's the holidays for chissake !
Hahahaha! So you think T Rex just ate lettuces before man's downfall?
Honestly, it's just mind boggling how idiotic some of these claims you're making are.
And yet you do this every day, claiming that you alone know what your god is like, what it can and can't do, what it wants - and you claim that everyone else is wrong.
You might want to reread your bible passages where Jesus talked about false prophets.
"God" is always a "Personal" thing ! To each his Own !
The right of nature... is the liberty each man hath to use his own power, as he will himself, for the preservation of his own nature; that is to say, of his own life.
Thomas Hobbes
True - which is why it's so arrogant of someone to claim that he alone knows what God is like and that everyone else is wrong. There are over 33,000 Christian sects, not to mention all the other religions, so the odds that any one person's claim is the absolute truth are pretty slim. My mom's priest, and my Mom as well, talk about what they think God is like - and they also add "but I could be wrong." They know they can't be sure their views are the correct ones (perhaps they also take Jesus' admonition against false prophets to heart). If you ask my Mom what she thinks Heaven will be like, she doesn't make grandiose claims about thrones and corporeal bodies and such ... she just says "I don't know, I just know it will be wonderful!."
Is the "ONE" actually "Wrong"....or just not how you "Feel".
When it comes to religion, I take everyone's "Opinion" with a grain of salt, unless the Finite "Logic says you are wrong" comes out of someone's mouth. No need to get all "Verklempt" over One persons thought process, until then.
Are you serious?
1.1.6 is straight from the seed and you cited it as such.
So much for the idea that Mary was the only victim of god's affection for rape
God didn’t do any such thing. The Holy Spirit placed Jesus inside Mary who knew no man before the virgin birth of our savior, the messiah. All of humanity who choose to believe in God are sons and daughters of Him by choice.
If I cited something as such you couldn’t have questioned that they were my words. All un cited posts are my words. 🤫
The Holiday where we celebrate the birth of the Messiah sent to save the world from sin.
Keep doubling down on your ignorance regarding evolution or science in general.
Here's the difference: I don't go by belief, especially where science is concerned. I go by where the evidence leads. And the empirical evidence clearly shows we progressed from "ooze to intelligent ape" (to put it in layman terms). That is irrefutable. Simply claiming it isn't so or claiming evolution is false, without anything to back such claims up, is not only ignorant, but also intellectually lazy/dishonest and a flat out lie!
You can go by mere belief if you want. I'll go by evidence/facts. Although, I'm not sure why anyone would follow a god/religion that views them as worthless or a POS unless they kiss god's @ss.
That's nice. Prove it!
Spend 90 minutes:
Personally I disagree with Dr. Collins' belief in the Christian God, but this shows how a rational human being might approach holding true to such beliefs without denying well founded science. Denying evolution is akin to self-imposed blinders to cut off all new information and festering in stale beliefs.
GET DUMBER HERE...
The new site slogan for those on the secular left to use? My seed will actually enhance intelligence and wisdom.
Only in your mind! Meanwhile, in reality, rational people turn to science for enhancement of intelligence and wisdom.
we all turn to science where appropriate as the article clearly shows scientists at the top of certain fields still not accepting of evolution as the source of origins despite their use and pursuit of science in a lot of other areas.
You deem one of the most highly corroborated theories of science a worldwide conspiracy. Your gauge for 'appropriate' is clearly wrong.
HA,
DNA does not lie. So we know that the earth is older than 6,000 years old. Furthermore, The OT was written by Jews and Jews don't believe that either. You really should read what Enoch wrote about how evolution and the age of the earth are seen through the original authors of the OT. Oddly enough, I seem to notice you have no interest in what a Rabbi would have to say about what the Jewish people themselves say on the topic.
God doesn’t lie. He said He created the earth and us so if we don’t believe Him on that then there’s no point in believing Him on anything else. No one is denying that the core of the earth could well be ancient based on Genesis 1:1. Lastly the article I seeded is all about a secular Jew and his research.
This explains perfectly why biblical literalists are unable to accept science. They'll deny any fact if it disagrees with what they so desperately need to believe.
You presume that the God character in the Bible is the actual creator and that the words attributed to Him are real (and true). But that character is defined as a contradiction and thus logically cannot exist; contradictions prove a proposition false. The Bible itself is errant and self-contradictory. It reads as one would expect from a team project of ancient men working and re-working stories over thousands of years. It is a great piece of semi-historical literature but is also its best evidence against its divinity.
God (as in supreme entity) might exist but the extant God is not the self-refuting character defined by ancient authors of the Bible. God, based on the evidence thus far, is unknown — beyond the reach of everyone. Nobody can truthfully come on a social media forum and speak for the grandest possible entity because nobody has any knowledge of this entity. (At least nobody has offered evidence of such knowledge.) And it is far worse when one flat out contradicts modern evidence-grounded knowledge of reality based on the writings of ancient men with pens.
No, HA, ancient men pretending to be the supreme entity, creator of everything made that claim.
This seed should be tagged SATIRE.
... and 'sad':
To think that someone with the availability of information that exists today would make that bizarrely ridiculous statement on a public forum. It states the exact opposite of what is demonstrably true — that evolution continues to be shown to be spot on — especially now with genetic sciences validating the conclusions from the fossil record, etc.
Biochemical evolution is the foundation of modern biology which in turn is the basis for all biochemical products (and that includes medicine, vaccines, etc.). What kind of confusion enables one to hold that evolution is pseudoscience and fraud?
Who said that we are a total failure? God didn’t. He didn’t give up on us and in fact doubled down on the importance of Humanity in his creation post second coming.
That is the MBFC opinion but it’s from a source they haven’t relabeled yet.
Incorrect again. It is my opinion of a bullshit seed which has zero to do with your continued petulance
about MBFC or any other rules here.
We are all guests...
When is it not appropriate?
Such "scientists" are also not experts in the field of biology, offer nothing which discredits evolution in the least, much less supports their own assertions, and clearly seem to have a religious bias against established science and evidence which contradicts their own beliefs.
How do you know? On what do you base that assumption? I doubt you know god personally.
So because someone or something makes a claim, we to simply accept that claim, no questions asked? DO you believe everything you're told?
It's far older than what YEC would have us believe.
If we weren't a "failure," then he wouldn't have tried to start over, as it were.
MBFC and other liberal ‘fact’ checkers has labeled almost all Christian sites that share my religious beliefs to be off their scale simply because we believe in creation and the flood and or that believe Angels are real. They also rate off the scale conservative environmental and economic sites that don’t drink the global warming cults kool aid. They do so to political conservative sites that like Trump too much as well. They MBFC are a part of the Poynter foundation’s IFCN which is a watch dog for the lamestreem media bias and are funded by the Soros Open Society group. You are right that we have to follow the rules as dictated by them. No one disputes that.
Why should such beliefs, which are without merit and are contradicted by scientific evidence, be given any platform or legitimacy?
See previous statement! But I'm sure there are plenty of other sites that do peddle your brand of nonsense.
Yes, my universe of sites stored on my phone has expanded considerably since the new coc went into effect with our board of censors as part of it. I have introduced you all to all sorts of new to me sites since most of my old reliables have been taken away and still are being with every new re rating they do. Like it or not MBFC is here and is the law. The law can be obeyed in spirit of to the letter of.
Nice to show that you favor the silencing of opinion and belief that is in opposition to your own.
I'm silencing no one. But I will challenge differing "opinions," especially if they are masqueraded as belief and passed off as fact when they lack any supporting evidence. Such "opinions" are without merit or validity and really have no value or place in intelligent or relevant discussion. Especially where scientific matters are concerned.
All sorts of places that believe as I do are listed as pseudoscience by our censorship board. By that definition they use I stand proudly and defiantly as a willful pseudoscience practitioner and make no apologies for it. I am openly pro creation, believe in the global flood and believe that Angels are real as messengers of God and as our guardians.
We know. You are very proud of your beliefs. You cannot put together a single argument based on facts and reason to support your beliefs, but you insist that you hold truth and that worldwide science is wrong and that all religions that disagree with you are wrong.
Perhaps your places are listed (rightfully so) as pseudoscience because you only go by mere belief and no evidence or facts. You don't seem to understand that belief is not the same as fact or evidence. So while you're free to believe whatever you want, no one is obliged to give your beliefs any platform or validation. And since you stand behind your admitted willful ignorance and intellectual dishonesty, expect to be challenged and not taken seriously when you peddle your beliefs as fact, especially what actual science contradicts you!
Most religious oriented sites are all about their beliefs regardless of the issue. So because a denomination is all into creation and Angels it’s off limits even on political issues they also discuss that the denomination may care about. There are literally whole denominations news and issues web sites banned here either because a bigot deemed them pseudoscience or his organization hasn’t rated them at all. Then we get told we should be happy because we can seed from other Christians websites whose religious and or political views are acceptable here even If we belong to a questionable belief system or one that hasn’t been reviewed and never will be. I once had an article about angels locked because the United Methodist news web site hadn’t been rated by our censorship board and that’s about as mainstream a denomination as there is.
Go to biologos.org and you will find tons of videos and articles to seed about science and how some feel it relates to Christianity. While you are at it, read them.
But they don't all keep it to just mere belief. How many try to pass off their beliefs as fact?
How is creation and angels a political issue exactly? Perhaps it's off limits because it doesn't actually relate to other topics?
Well, they're certainly not actual science. Remember what I said about presenting actual evidence to support assertions? That's how real science works. So deeming them pseudoscience is understandable. Even then, that's giving religious sites too much credit. Perhaps someone doesn't think such sites should have a platform where it has no relevance or value, especially as it relates to other topics.
Isn't that what you want or try to do? So what's the problem?
This article is among the more stupid that I've read this week. The author is scientifically illiterate. Way to foster ignorance!
Always happy to defy the censors here and fly the flag of creation high and proud!
Promoting willful ignorance is not something I'd be proud of. More like embarrassed and ashamed.
I’ll always be able to find pro creation/ global flood articles and anti human mostly caused global warming articles from sites that are still ok to use here ....censorship in whatever form always has ways to work around it.
So what's the problem?
As the board of censors re rates various conservative and evangelical Christian sites, it gets ever more difficult to find work arounds.
Then stop trying to push untruths and propaganda, problem would disappear. They are LYING.
Then start reading actual facts instead of posting delusional bullshit. No workarounds are needed if you don't seed lies.
Perhaps if evangelical Christians would show a little more intellectual honesty and less sanctimonious arrogance, they would meet resistance.If they feel they're being censored or whatever, perhaps the problem lies with them.
So you are so arrogant as to say that people who believe differently than you do about issues regarding religion and origins are just lying. Sorry but we are not and we will continue to express creation and intelligent design as long as we shall live or the 2nd coming which ever happens first.
But you merely expressing that you believe in the God of the Bible is simply a statement of your belief. Do you see the difference between that and items 1 and 2?
They are when they posit their beliefs as fact or truth, especially when they offer nothing empirical to support their assertions or when they are directly contradicted by actual empirical evidence and facts! There's a big difference in stating your belief, and trying to express your belief as fact/truth.
So you're going to continue lying then? Got it!