Dawkinswatch

Exposing Evolution As A Mess and Atheism As Hot-Air!

Scientists Who Reject Evolution

with 11 comments

I love the megiddo video series because it exposes many issues which many choose to ignore.

Richard Dawkins for obvious reasons detests scientists who question the validity  theory of evolution even though the missing links are yet to be found.  But scientific research does not take place in a political vacuum and in the universities Evolutionist are intolerant of dissent and anyone who wishes to advance their careers are well adviced to stay clear of their way.


AddThis Social Bookmark Button

Advertisements

Written by dawkinswatch

March 12, 2008 at 4:49 pm

11 Responses

Subscribe to comments with RSS.

  1. Yes, I know Behe, having earned my Bachelor’s Degree in Molecular Biology at Lehigh University. What a fraud – unwilling or unable to answer his critics with any evidence whatsoever, with each and every one of his examples of “irreducible complexity” demonstrated to be reducible.

    Dan

    March 12, 2008 at 5:15 pm

  2. By the way, did you know that the one time Behe tried to demonstrate irreducible complexity, he actually showed that the complex feature was extremely easy to re-evolve! And he admits that this proves reducibility!

    It’s the basis for a 2004 paper that he published with Michael Snokes in the journal Protein Science, if memory serves. If you don’t believe me, look up his testimony on that and his other bogus claims in the Dover trial (Kitzmiller et al.), which is freely available on the web.

    Dan

    March 12, 2008 at 5:25 pm

  3. In universities, evidence is valued. So are theories. So is honesty. Creationists don’t have any of them.

    It’s flabbergastingly pathetic that people like you whine about how “evolutionists” (biologists) are supposedly dogmatic. What’s dogmatic is your ideology: Christianity.

    Joseph K. Frantz

    March 12, 2008 at 5:44 pm

  4. “…even though the missing links are yet to be found.”

    Ah, this old saw. Love it. Which ones are you referring to? Apart, obviously, from the thousands and thousands that actually [i]have[/i] been found…

    rebeldreams

    March 13, 2008 at 12:48 pm

  5. Missing link between man and apes sir?

    Piltdown? peking man?

    dawkinswatch

    March 13, 2008 at 10:02 pm

    • they were both hoaxes used for evolutionists to support their belief. amigo …

      anonymous

      August 22, 2010 at 10:02 pm

  6. “Missing link between man and apes sir?”

    Which one, between the genera Australopithecus and Homo there are, I think, about a dozen separate species.

    Dan

    March 14, 2008 at 7:22 am

  7. “Missing link between man and apes sir?”

    For a more comprehensive listing of hominid species, including a timeline, see here.

    Dan

    March 14, 2008 at 7:33 am

  8. Good list there, Dan.

    dawkinswatch; just a little evolution101 refresher here. Almost every fossil of a new species discovered can be termed a missing link, unless it is truly the last of its line (e.g. the dinosaurs found butted up against the K-T boundary).

    The discovery of a devonian fish with slightly adapted limbs, below one with slightly better-adapted limbs and so on constitutes “missing links”, “transitional forms” or any of the other tags one wishes to ascribe them.

    rebeldreams

    March 15, 2008 at 5:47 pm

    • name a process that adds information to the genomes of organisms in order to obtain the “adaptations” necessary for advancement of the amebas towards humanity.

      anonymous

      August 22, 2010 at 10:49 pm

  9. There you go again, dear blogger, saying stupid things. It is of no relevance that some scientests choose not to believe in evolution, especually those that lived before the idea’s formulation. There doubts are not based on the evidence. The science that they did was.

    It all comes down to that. All you prating and whining; all your lies and conspiracy theories; all your stubbornly held misconceptions and your willful ignorance do not change the simple fact. Evolution has evidence. All the inane things you seem to believe do not. That kind of bothers you, doesn’t it? I have always wondered why some simple-minded people are so weak and insecure that they must run and hide from simple truth.

    Here is an analogous behavior: I maintain, never having seen it that a certain wall is white. I then look at the wall and it is black. “Hmmm…” I say, “Oddest shade of white I ever did see but I was right. It’s white!”

    The above exaple is no diffrent from saying “I think a deity created the world a few thousand years ago.” and, upon being shown the overwhelming mountain of fact that contradicts your belief, saying “Yep, I was right. Creationism is the way to go!”

    Why is that? Why are creationists so afraid of that they must run from reality? I just don’t get it.

    Mike

    April 10, 2008 at 6:54 pm


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: