TITLE: A view without Prejudice (Part 2) 5/16/15
By Richard McCaw
SEND A PRIVATE COMMENT
SEND ARTICLE TO A FRIEND
A View without Prejudice (Part 2)
(Jack Summers, an investigative reporter dreams that he is attending an assessment of the evolution/creation controversy in a Ft. Lauderdale town hall. Opponents wish to ban Darwin’s "Origin of Species" from educational institutions. After years of subtle divisions even between eminent scientists, judges are seeking a final view without prejudice).
I watch as Alfred Russell Wallace, Mr. Darwin’s lawyer, stands and raising his voice slightly says, “Your honor, on behalf of my client I wish to enter a plea of not guilty. The charge entered against Mr. Darwin’s book is preposterous and baseless arising from deep-seated ignorance, unscientific tradition and religious prejudice!”
Lord Monboddo, the chief judge, listens as the defense declares unconstitutional that Darwin’s book be banned from the education syllabus, but overrules the motion so that the charge may be legally presented and handled justly.
When Wallace sits down it is too late to continue and the assessment is dismissed for that day.
When I return on the third day of assessment, July 15, 2025, Wallace with some agitation begins “Your honor, people have placed faith in a god they cannot see. The church has taught people to swallow the Bible without question. Did anyone see God create Eve from Adam’s rib? Surely God could have started evolution. Mr. Darwin did not declare that God was not involved. Religion is about faith and morals. Science is about facts and reality, things we can touch, see and feel. We have overwhelming evidence.”
Lord Monboddo then asks Mr. Robert Virchow, the state representative, “Mr. Virchow, can you respond?”
“Your honor,” Mr. Virchow replies. “Scientists have also placed faith in transformations they have neither seen nor tested, but broadcast as fact before presenting undisputed evidence. We are here today to look at facts without prejudice. We want to see evidence, the incontrovertible, undeniable proof. We are not here for the speculations of scientists who wish to prove a theory, and who are chasing a dream to make themselves famous and rich!
The only way we can verify the past is to have reliable eyewitness accounts. Evolutionists assert that this does not exist. Their propositions therefore arise out of assumptions about the past.
Most evolutionists first arrive at their scientific philosophies not through rigidly logical means but through hunches and wild guessing. Guided by faith in an idea and wishing to be accepted by his peers, a scientist will toil for years truly believing that his theory is accurate but erecting experiment upon experiment, the outcomes of which he trusts will prove him right.
One eminent scientist has declared that scientists support science whether some of its constructs are patently absurd. Even if the scientific community tolerates its unsubstantiated commitment to materialism, scientists are compelled by their nonanalytic and prior attachment to material causes to erect a structure of inquiry and a group of ideas that issue only material explanations, despite it being counterintuitive or mystifying to the non-scientist and layman. Moreover, the entire framework must be completely materialistic in order that there can be no acceptance of anything divine or supernatural in the realm of science.
If you ask me, sir, evolution is built upon nothing else but faith, faith in the imagination of things unseen - fossils that cannot be laid out, faith in a non-existent embryological evidence, faith in such experiments as breeding that never work. And that faith never produces evidence because it is never validated by anything visible that works.”
In rebuttal Mr. Wallace stands akimbo and lifts his voice again, “Intelligent design proponents teach that Darwin’s evolution has fostered ideas that are foundationally wrong. However the facts deny this. For 146 years evolution has survived extensive scientific scrutiny and the US National Academy of Sciences has recognized it as modern biology’s most important concept.
Darwin’s evolution has assisted in the interpretation of the fossil record, the understanding of bacterial resistance to antibiotics, and has outlined rapid species changes now appearing right before us. It exposes outstanding examples of cave-dwelling species whose functional eyes are covered by skin flaps. The biotechnology industry has even drawn upon natural selection to invent new drugs.”
That last response of the defense left me somewhat intellectually stunned. How could so-called intelligent people make such claims? Some scientists have already found flaws in Darwin’s theory, and that is why they propose Neo-Darwinism. Then to appeal to the length of time a scientific belief has existed is ridiculous. So did the scientists of Columbus’ days. And to refer to the approval of a top scientific organization does not prove that evolution is a fact. Top scientific organizations have often supported theories that have been later disproved.
Long before Darwin, scientists were making myriads of discoveries. And if the theory had never been formulated, scientists would still be making significant contributions by new discoveries. These arguments are fallacious in the extreme. It seems to me that Evolution has become some kind of god, the Savior of every human ailment.
Because I had research so intensely, I began to wonder how Darwin could ever plead not guilty, considering the fact that many people have swallowed the entire theory of evolution without investigating the details for themselves. I know that many people like me have accepted the theory as an excuse to become atheists. Others like some of my friends happily believe it because it allows them to live without moral restraints. Some who have been seriously hurt by religious people have made a complete escape from religion.
Although I was an atheist, my grandmother had brought me up on Bible verses, such as 1 Thessalonians 5:21, which I remember says, “Prove all things, hold fast to that is good.”
I was in that town hall to hear all the proof anyone could bring to convince myself that there was no God, and that I simply evolved from other animals, millions of years ago. I have yet to hear any logically sound argument that genuinely proves that evolution is a scientific fact.
The opinions expressed by authors may not necessarily reflect the opinion of FaithWriters.com.