evolution doubts

Keith Mathison has reviewed James Le Fanu’s book Why Us?: How Science Rediscovered the Mystery of Ourselves.

It sounds interesting:

What is potentially more interesting in this case is that Le Fanu does not raise his doubts from the perspective of Christianity or even Intelligent Design. On the existence of a Creator, Le Fanu seems to be agnostic (p. 122). His argument is more basic. He argues that Darwinism should be objectively judged like any other scientific theory and concludes that if it is judged objectively, we have to conclude that Darwinism is insufficient to account for all of the facts of nature. To demonstrate this, he focuses most of his attention on the discoveries of the New Genetics, in particular the Human Genome Project, as well as research into the workings of the human brain. He argues that purely physical and material processes alone do not account for all that we encounter and that there must be some kind of non-material biological phenomenon in existence as well.

Le Fanu spends a considerable amount of time criticizing the weaknesses of Darwinism as science. He claims that Darwinism has survived as long as it has only because it is often formulated in such a way that it becomes immune to any and all criticism. Furthermore, he argues, in this one case, scientists prefer what many of them know to be a bad theory to no theory at all. This, he believes, results in Darwinism being a hindrance rather than a help to good science. He writes, “The greatest obstacle to scientific progress, after all, is not ignorance, but the illusion of knowledge” (p. 108). Darwinists, he argues, have locked themselves into a self-made intellectual prison that prevents them from seeing, much less exploring, the truly interesting questions about life.

I would like to recommend again the book Who was Adam for anyone interested in seeing creationists’ attempt to formulate a truly scientific model for creation that accounts for the fossil evidence and genetic advances.

Don McElroy has been relentlessly pilloried by the media and “scientific community” for having the temerity to express doubts about darwinian evolution that are similar to those expressed by Le Fanu. His confirmation as Chairman of the Board of Education is currently pending in the Texas Senate. This might be a good time to express support for him to your Texas state senator, especially if you live in Senator Watson or Shapleigh’s district.

Mathison expects the same treatment for Le Fanu from the notoriously open minded, tolerant, willing to learn and admit error scientific community:

One does not have to be a prophet or the son of a prophet to predict the response that Le Fanu’s book will receive from the defenders of Darwinist orthodoxy. (Simply witness the response to Ben Stein’s film Expelled). We can expect shrill and dismissive book reviews, articles, and blog comments accusing Le Fanu of everything from incipient senility to mental illness to (worst of all) being a “creationist.” Ironically, most of these comments and “reviews” will be written by people who have not read Le Fanu’s book. In the scientific world, Le Fanu has committed the equivalent of blasphemy. He is the newest “Danish cartoonist” of Darwinism.