Page 90 - The Dark Spell of Darwinism
P. 90

The Dark Spell of Darwinism




            terms in an appropriate place. But using such words won't help evolution-
            ists get around their great impasse, for many other basic questions stand in
            the way of their theory that evolutionists have to answer, but cannot.
                 Evolutionists must especially answer how the first cells and first living
            creatures came into being. Where did the mind-bogglingly sophisticated
            systems within a cell come from? And how did the imaginary transition
            from sea to land occur? Alternatively, they must explain what clear proofs
            there are for such matters as the supposed evolution of human beings, the
            origin of the extraordinary characteristics in animals, the source of self-sac-
            rifice and intelligent behavior in living creatures. They must also give con-
            crete proof for their claims about the gradual formation of structures like
            DNA, eyes and wings; about the development over time of cells' ability of
            to synthesize proteins flawlessly, and of blood to clot. As yet, no evolution-
            ist has come forward to present any clear, concrete proof of these most basic
            matters regarding the formation of living creatures. When you examine
            their lectures, books and articles, you will see that, when required to explain
            these matters, they try to divert attention by hiding them behind countless
            scientific terms, Latin words and sentences that ordinary people cannot un-
            derstand.
                 Taking this point of view, we can see that the theory of evolution is a
            word game based on empty talk, interesting inferences, guesses and sup-
            positions. It relies on long philosophical excursions and repetition of words
            that serve only to keep people from thinking. From the few titles of articles
            listed above, you can see that it is a word game based on incomprehensi-
            bility.
                 Evolutionists believe that they will reach their goals by using such
            methods, thinking they've given the impression of stating something in a
            highly scientific style. However, they are benefiting only from the fact that
            the general public knows very little about scientific matters.
                 To bring even more clarity to the matter, we can cite George
            Stavropoulos, a proponent of the theory of evolution, from an article he
            wrote in the journal American Scientist:

                                              88
   85   86   87   88   89   90   91   92   93   94   95