I’m With Stupid: Scientific Dissent From Darwinism
Remember the old t-shirt slogan, "I’m with stupid"; you know the one with the arrow pointing at the person beside you? Okay, well, if you do, hold onto that thought for a few moments while I rant a little bit.
First of all, I am tired of statements that I am constantly seeing put out there by evolutionists, atheists, or whomever, saying something like, "99.9% of all scientists accept evolution as fact". I am also tired of bigoted (and obviously incorrect) statements like the following:
"It is absolutely safe to say that if you meet somebody who claims not to believe in evolution, that person is ignorant, stupid, or insane (or wicked, but I’d rather not consider that)." – Richard Dawkins
Let’s take a look at what some other scientists besides ol’ Dick have to say about Darwinian evolution…
Philip S. Skell, Member National Academy of Sciences, Emeritus Evan Pugh Professor at Pennsylvania State University:
"Scientific journals now document many scientific problems and criticisms of evolutionary theory and students need to know about these as well. Many of the scientific criticisms of which I speak are well known by scientists in various disciplines, including the disciplines of chemistry and biochemistry, in which I have done my work."
Professor Colin Reeves, Dept of Mathematical Sciences Coventry University:
"Darwinism was an interesting idea in the 19th century, when handwaving explanations gave a plausible, if not properly scientific, framework into which we could fit biological facts. However, what we have learned since the days of Darwin throws doubt on natural selection’s ability to create complex biological systems – and we still have little more than handwaving as an argument in its favour."
Dr. Raul Leguizamon, M. D., Pathologist, and a professor of medicine at the Autonomous University of Guadalajara, Mexico:
"I am absolutely convinced of the lack of true scientific evidence in favour of Darwinian dogma. Nobody in the biological sciences, medicine included, needs Darwinism at all. Darwinism is certainly needed, however, in order to pose as a philosopher, since it is primarily a worldview. And an awful one, as George Bernard Shaw used to say."
FOLLOW THE LINK BELOW TO CONTINUE READING >>>