Page 104 - The Dark Spell of Darwinism
P. 104
The Dark Spell of Darwinism
They also get people under their dark spell by such deceptions as: "We
do have a lot of evidence, but not have enough time to consider it all, so,
we'll talk about something else." Or, "This book—or even an encyclopedia—
isn't big enough to contain the proofs for evolution, so I will talk only about
one or two," or, "I could explain proofs for the theory of evolution, but you
wouldn't understand, so never mind." This way, they never resolve the
basic questions that their theory should. The evolutionary biologist
Christopher Wills resorts to the same method in one of his books:
It will be necessary first to take a quick glance at some of the evidence that has
accumulated since the time of Darwin about how
evolution works. I will try to make this as pain-
less and interesting as possible. There is in any
case no way a book this size could cover it all. A
friend of mine has been working on an encyclo-
pedic evolution book for years and I wish him
luck. 52
However, what Wills says here has no rela-
tion to reality. As we said earlier, evolutionist
claims are totally incredible since they clearly go Christopher Wills
against scientific discoveries. So he is completely
wrong to state there is more proof than can be fitted into an encyclopedia.
He repeats this explanation so often to cover up why evolutionists always
present the same supposed proofs in every book and in every lecture. The
proof they offer has in fact been frequently refuted in many anti-evolution-
ist publications. Evolutionists realize that if they acknowledge these facts,
they'll be forced to admit the invalidity of their theory. For this reason, it
seems, they act as if no one has refuted their proofs.
Phillip E. Johnson states that the theory of evolution is supported only
by demagoguery and the power of persuasion:
The theory is sustained largely by a propaganda campaign that relies on all
the usual tricks of rhetorical persuasion: hidden assumptions, question-beg-
ging statements of what is at issue, terms that are vaguely defined and change
102
