Quotes of scientists that disagree with Darwin


Quotes of scientists that disagree with NeoDarwinism:

  1. "The neo-Darwinian theory is not a scientific theory in the true sense of the word. It is a dogma, a belief system, a metaphysical speculation." - Michael Denton, British biologist

  2. "Natural selection is not a creative force; it can only modify what already exists." - Jacques Monod, book Chance and Necessity. French biologist and Nobel laureate

  3. "The neo-Darwinian model is not sufficient to account for the complexity and diversity of life." - Francis Hitching, British journalist and author. "The Neck of the Giraffe" - book

  4. "The neo-Darwinian theory is not a testable scientific theory; it is a metaphysical belief system." - Michael Behe, American biochemist and author British evolutionary biologist

  5. "The neo-Darwinian theory is not a complete explanation for the origin of life." - Harold Morowitz, American biologist and biophysicist. Life Itself: A Comprehensive Inquiry into the Nature, Origin, and Structure of Life

  6. "The neo-Darwinian theory is not a satisfactory explanation for the evolution of complex biological systems." - Stuart Kauffman, American theoretical biologist. "At Home in the Universe" - book

  7. "The neo-Darwinian theory is based on a number of mathematical models that have been shown to be inadequate." - Denis Noble, British biophysicist

  8. "The neo-Darwinian theory is not a predictive theory; it cannot be used to predict the future course of evolution." - Johnjoe McFadden, British biochemist and author. The End of Evolution: Why We Can't Predict the Future of Life - book

  9. "The neo-Darwinian theory is not a scientific theory in the same sense as the theory of gravity or the theory of electromagnetism; it is a philosophical belief system." - William Dembski, American mathematician and philosopher

It is important to note that these quotes are just a small sample of the many scientists who have expressed doubts about NeoDarwinism. There is a growing body of evidence that suggests that NeoDarwinism is not a complete explanation for the origin of life or the evolution of complex biological systems. NeoDarwinism is likely to be debated for many years to come.


Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Beyond the Sequence: The Epigenetic "Fingers" That Play the DNA Keyboard

Image
Imagine the keyboard itself is not a standard piano keyboard, but a modular synthesizer, capable of producing an almost infinite array of sounds. The DNA sequence, then, represents the fundamental building blocks of this synthesizer, the raw materials from which all sounds are generated. Epigenetics, our "fingers," manipulates these building blocks, adjusting parameters like volume, timbre, and rhythm, transforming the raw potential of the DNA sequence into a symphony of cellular functions. We can further refine the "fingers" analogy. Consider that each finger represents a distinct epigenetic mechanism: DNA methylation, histone modifications, and non-coding RNA.  DNA methylation, for instance, might be the "index finger," capable of precisely silencing specific genes, like muting individual keys on the synthesizer. Histone modifications, the "middle finger," could represent the ability to adjust the accessibility of the DN...
Read more

Why are Christian philosophers running towards Darwin while biologists are "running" away?

Image
As nature reveals the strength of epigenetics and the weakness of Neo-Darwinism, biologists are “running” away from the long-standing accepted theory. In The Federalist , April 2019, Benjamin Dierker reviews “Why one-third of biologists now question Darwinism”: "Current estimates are that approximately one-third of professional academic biologists who do not believe in intelligent design find Darwin’s Theory inadequate to describe all of the complexity in biology.” Dierker continues, “The important note is that these are not ideologues or religious zealots, nor do they propose a god or biblical solution.  Rather, they find problems in the lack of explanatory power of Darwin’s theory in light of modern understanding of mutation, variation, DNA sequencing and more. These expressions of doubt do not reject naturalism or evolution per se, but the rigor of the Neo-Darwinian model for explaining the development of life.” For 40 years, scientists calculated natural se...
Read more

Rewriting the Rules: Epigenomic Mutation Bias Challenges Randomness in Evolution

Image
This research challenges the long-held dogma that mutations occur randomly, irrespective of their consequences, by demonstrating a clear, epigenome-mediated mutation bias in Arabidopsis thaliana . The study meticulously unveils how mutation rates are not uniform across the genome but are significantly reduced in functionally constrained regions, particularly within gene bodies and essential genes. This discovery fundamentally alters our understanding of evolutionary processes, suggesting that mutation is not a purely directionless force. "Mutation bias reflects natural selection in Arabidopsis thaliana" This opening statement encapsulates the core finding: mutation rates are not random but reflect epigenetic pressures. The authors demonstrate that mutations are less frequent in crucial genomic regions, directly contradicting the prevailing theory of random mutation. This observation suggests an active mechanism that minimizes deleterious mutations in essentia...
Read more