Famous Scientists Reject Darwinian Evolution

Why Abiogenesis Is Impossible
http://www.trueorigin.org/abio.asp

NASA Presents! We NEVER thought we hear dyed-in-the-wool-Evolutionists SPEAKING OUT AGAINST evolution! What Gives?
NASA Presents! "Evolutionism is a fairy tale for grown-ups. This theory has helped nothing in the progress of science. It is useless." - Bounoure, Le Monde et la Vie (October 1983) [Director of Research at the National Center of Scientific Research in France]


"It might be argued that the theory is quite unsubstantiated and has status only as a speculation." - George G. Simpson, Major Features, pp. 118-119

NASA Presents! "The particular truth is simply that we have no reliable evidence as to the evolutionary sequence." - J. Bonner, "Book Review," American Scientist 49:1961, p. 240

NASA Presents! "The facts fail to give any information regarding the origin of actual species, not to mention the higher categories." - Richard Goldschmidt, The Natural Basis of Evolution, p. 165

NASA Presents! "For all its acceptance in the scientific works as the great unifying principle of biology, Darwinism, after a century and a quarter, is in a surprising amount of trouble." - Francis Hitching, The Neck of the Giraffe (1982), p. 12


"Throughout the past century there has always existed a significant minority of first-rate biologists who have never been able to bring themselves to accept the validity of Darwinian claims. In fact, the number of biologists who have expressed some degree of disillusionment is practically endless." - Michael Denton, Evolution: A Theory in Crisis (1985), p. 327


NASA Presents! "Evolution became in a sense a scientific religion; almost all scientists have accepted it and many are prepared to bend' their observations to fit with it.... To my mind, the theory does not stand up at all." - H.S. Lipson, "A Physicist Looks at Evolution," Physics Bulletin, Vol. 31, p. 138 (1980)


NASA Presents! "Unfortunately for Darwin's future reputation ... every one of his theories is contradicted by facts." - T. Mora, The Dogma of Evolution, p. 194
http://www.ministers-best-friend.com/NASA-Startling-Quotes-Against-Evolution-...

Ministry Overview web page - http://hosted.homeserver.com/warneveryone/ministry_overview.htm
Proverbs 10:14
Wise people store up knowledge, but the mouth of the foolish is near destruction.

Modern evolutionists often give us the impression that evolution was accepted by the scientific community of Darwin's day. But the scientists of Darwin's day didn't hear his theory, slap themselves on the forehead, and say, "Of course!" In fact, some of the most influential scientists of the day were hostile to Darwinian evolution.

Take Adam Sedgwick, for example. Although he taught field geology to Charles Darwin, he flatly rejected Darwin's theory. After reading Darwin's book, he wrote to Darwin that parts of it were completely false and filled him with sorrow. Astronomer Sir John Herschel also rejected Darwin's theory. A fellow of the prestigious Royal Society, he called Darwinian evolution, "the law of higgledy-piggledy." Evolution claims that life developed spontaneously by time and chance, but Louis Pasteur was motivated to prove that life only comes from life. Science philosopher William Whewell would not allow Darwin's book into the Cambridge University Library. James Clerk Maxwell strongly opposed Darwinian evolution.

Ironically, it was the churchmen of Darwin's time who embraced Darwinian evolution. And when those who grew up in evolutionist churches got their science degrees, all they knew was that "everyone" had always supported evolution. This illustrates how a church's lack of faithfulness can change the worldview of an entire culture for the worse.

Prayer: Lord, protect and preserve me from ever being led into false belief. Amen.

References: Creation, 9-11-99, pp. 26-27, "Holy War?"

Darwin's book into the Cambridge University Library

Category:

People & Blogs

Tags:

• Darwin
• Sagan
• Adam
• Sedgwick
• Cambridge
• University
• James
• Clerk
• Maxwell

[trefod]

How is this an argument against evolution? This is exactly how science works. Any new theory receives flak until it has been thoroughly tested... This is also why creationism, homeopathy and cold fusion can't gain any foothold... It continually fails all its tests.

[KyleAndDougsRandomTV]

@SonofJaphet Okay, I'm up to some pretty important stuff right now, and I don't have time for this at the moment.

That's totally untrue, and I don't know where you heard that kind of bogus, or if you may be mistaken, perhaps with another species that WAS hoaxed, maybe "Archaeoraptor"...? You wanna argue about it, contact me personally. Thanks and have a wonderful day.

[SonofJaphet]

@KyleAndDougsRandomTV Archaeopteryx is a hoax yet you still believe it as true ,are you really rational?

[scienceandhiphop2011]

This is a whole new level of stupid.....

[MrJimgerard]

Geez, anyone from the 20th Century?

[KyleAndDougsRandomTV]

Yes, evolution was initially rejected by science. Until a few years later when Archaeopteryx was discovered, all that began to change.

[mehico33]

Darwin was a ground breaker, why would the objections of scientists of his day mean anything at all? We are now enlightened, the entire field of biology takes evolution as fact (and rightfully so), there certainly are holes(or rather "gaps") in our understanding of the fact of evolution unfortunately(or perhaps not so unfortunately) there is not one other theory that comes close to the credibility of Evolution theory(which has changed a little since darwins day)

[NetraAmorosi]

Creationism/Intelligent Design on the other hand, has crap for support. The Bible isn't support as the bible in regards to this (and many other things) has no support. You people really should either A: Pickup some text books and actually start learning what is currently known. And/or B: Stop trying to deceive people, its easy for us non-sheep to see that many, no most, of the "Intelligent Design" "Scientists" for the crooks and deceivers that they are.

[NetraAmorosi]

Evolution doesn't cover Abiogenesis it covers development of life AFTER life initiated, Nor have I heard scientists say that Darwin's version of evolution was accepted back, in fact the opposite is true. Also the notion that Evolution has little to no evidence is 100% crap. It has mountains of evidence, its in fact the best supported Scientific Theory in science itself. If it had little to no support it wouldn't be supported by the scientific community.

[pimpymcdougall]

@BereanBeacon1 I have the love of my friends and family. I use logic and common sense. I am not delusional or mentally ill. You can keep your hateful, murderous, jealous, useless god.