Darwin is Dead-Living the Lie

Many Darwinists like to claim that creationists and proponents of Intelligent Design are liars, idiots or fools. This tends to deflect a debate on the actual issues. Such Darwinists are unfortunately very common in our school systems, busily indoctrinating the young. Allow me to present exhibit one, your honor....

SURVIVAL OF THE FAKEST:

"SCIENCE NOW KNOWS THAT MANY OF THE PILLARS OF DARWINIAN THEORY ARE EITHER FALSE OR MISLEADING. YET BIOLOGY TEXTS CONTINUE TO PRESENT THEM AS FACTUAL EVIDENCE OF EVOLUTION. WHAT DOES THIS IMPLY ABOUT THEIR SCIENTIFIC STANDARDS?"-- JONATHAN WELLS

"It was only when I was finishing my Ph.D. in cell
and development biology, however, that I noticed what at
first I took to be a strange anomaly. The textbook I was
using prominently featured drawings of vertebrate embryos
– fish, chickens, humans, etc. – where similarities were presented
as evidence for descent from a common ancestor.
Indeed, the drawings did appear very similar. But I’d been
studying embryos for some time, looking at them under a
microscope. And I knew that the drawings were just plain
wrong."

Notice the Haeckel drawings above left and some actual embryos above right. Haeckel's embryos are still being used in textbooks today in a blatant attempt to use fake information to brainwash students. The author continues:

"We all remember them from biology class: the
experiment that created the “building blocks of life” in a
tube; the evolutionary “tree,” rooted in the primordial slime
and branching out into animal and plant life. Then there
were the similar bone structures of, say, a bird’s wing and
a man’s hand, the peppered moths, and Darwin’s finches.
And, of course, the Haeckel embryos.

As it happens, all of these examples, as well as
many others purportedly standing as evidence of evolution,
turn out to be incorrect. Not just slightly off. Not just
slightly mistaken. On the subject of Darwinian evolution,
the texts contained massive distortions and even some faked
evidence. Nor are we only talking about high-school textbooks
that some might excuse (but shouldn’t) for adhering
to a lower standard. Also guilty are some of the most prestigious
and widely used college texts, such as Douglas Futuyma’s
Evolutionary Biology, and the latest edition of the
graduate-level textbook Molecular Biology of the Cell, coauthored
by the president of the National Academy of Sciences,
Bruce Alberts. In fact, when the false “evidence” is
taken away, the case for Darwinian evolution, in the textbooks
at least, is so thin it’s almost invisible."

The article was first published in The American Spectator - December 2000 / January 2001

But why would Darwinists do this? Aren't scientists supposed to be seekers of truth and knowledge? How could they possibly either produce or abide the dissemination of deliberately false information?

Because it is a matter of faith!

I appreciated a commenter in a previous post who directed me to a site where I found this quote: "Faith is a cop-out. It is intellectual bankruptcy. If the only way you can accept an assertion is by faith, then you are conceding that it can't be taken on its own merits." - Dan Barker

I completely disagree with that statement. I have faith in God and you cannot prove that God exists. However, I have found that Darwinists are in the same boat as myself in a way. You cannot prove macroevolution, and the evidence is less than shaky, leaving them with faith. But they must have this faith, many of them, because.....

Darwinism is one of the doctrines of the faith of Atheistic Humanism.

Richard Dawkins said, "Darwin made it possible to be an intellectually- fulfilled atheist."

“[I suppose the reason] we all jumped at the Origin [of Species] was because the idea of God interfered with our sexual mores.” - Julian Huxley, British biologist. (See full post here.)

Dictionary.com defines Humanism as, "A system of thought that centers on humans and their values, capacities, and worth." Taken to the level of a religion, Atheistic Humanism is the worship of man and his abilities and capacities. Man is believed to be evolving into Superman:

"Since God is dead Neitzsche sees the necessity for the emergence of the Übermensch, the Superman or overman, who is to replace God.

The first of the quotes attributed to Zarathustra is:-

"I teach you the Superman. Man is something that should be overcome. What have you done to overcome him?
All creatures hitherto have created something beyond themselves: and do you want to be the ebb of the great tide, and return to the animals rather than overcome man?
What is the ape to men? A laughing stock or a painful embarassment. And just so shall man be to the Superman: a laughing stock or a painful embarassment".

The context in which Supermen are to be judged to be such is implied by Neitzsche's previous works. He maintained that all human behavior is motivated by the will to power. In its positive sense, the will to power is not simply power over others, but the power over oneself that is necessary for creativity. Supermen are those who have overcome man - i.e. the individual self - and subliminated the will to power into a momentous creativity.

Supermen are creators of a "master morality" that reflects the strength and independence of one who is liberated from all values, except those that he deems valid. Such power is manifested in independence, creativity, and originality." (text highlighted by me)

Neitzsche saying "God is dead" meant that the concept of God was dead and that is echoed by Darwinist scientists. In order for the concept of God to be killed off, macroevolution must then be, for there must be an explanation for life in all of it's amazing variety other than "In the beginning God created..." whether true or false.

Atheistic Humanism is a religion! The overwhelming evidence aligned against Evolution in the fossil record, geological record and other sciences would logically convince the scientific community at large to abandon Darwinism. Why has it not? Conceptual Bias. There are a large percentage of scientists who belong to the ABG club, “Anything But God!” For them, Macroevolution is part of their belief systems, a part that allows them to throw God aside in the face of overwhelming evidence to the contrary.

Ironically, Darwinist Scientists today find themselves in the same position as the Catholic Church of the 1600’s, who defended the idea that the earth was the center of the solar system from the teachings of Copernicus. Galileo was imprisoned for spreading that word and Bruno was tortured and killed. Now it is the immense body of evidence that cries out for Creationism and the growing number of scientists who proclaim that fact who are, like the followers of Copernicus, being vilified and ridiculed for speaking truth. Creation scientists often face an inquisition of words because they are not, in the minds of Darwinists, debating scientific evidence. They are attacking the very faith of the Darwinist!

As a Christian, I welcome debate concerning my faith. I am confident in the evidence that I have and the faith that I have in my God. But Darwinists want to cut off debate and shut the mouths of the creationists and ID'ers because they are not confident in their evidence and uncomfortable with the debate. This is why comment sections on this subject are full of ad hominem attacks and ridicule. Fear of losing one's religion, a religion that allows man to make his own moral judgements.

"...liberated from all values, except those that he deems valid." The Atheistic Humanist wants to live by his own creed and be responsible to no one other than himself. Being beholden to a Creator God who would have the right to set moral standards is anathema to him. So he will fight using any means necessary to avoid that thought. Including, as this posting began, indoctrinating the young with knowingly faked evidence for Darwinism.

"God is dead!" - Neitzsche

"Neitzsche is dead!" - God