Page 192 - Death of the Darwinist Dajjal System
P. 192

Death of the Darwinist Dajjal System






               evidence that have been proven and corroborate evolution. All we
               have are frequently used scientific terms and formulae. One can
               often encounter such interesting terminology or chemical for-
               mulae in books by any Darwinist author. When someone igno-
               rant of the subject looks at such books, he may really imagine
               that it contains a scientist’s scientific knowledge. But appear-
               ances are deceptive. The only thing described in such a book is the
               myth that living things emerged and assumed their present forms
               as the result of blind chance. No Darwinist author has anything new
               to say, nor any scientific evidence to present. The chemical terminolo-
               gy and formulae are merely in order to complete the Darwinist decep-

               tion and, in their eyes, give it a realistic air.
                   The evolutionary paleontologist S. M. Stanley provides an exam-
               ple of Darwinist methods of misusing science:
                   Evolution happens rapidly in small, localized populations, so we’re not
                   likely to see it in the fossil record. 136
                   These words are misleading. The extract refers to evolution taking
               place in local populations, but there is no evidence. It is even admitted
               that no evidence will be found, but even this is given a scientific gloss.
               The fact of the matter is this; no evolution can be seen in the fossil
               record, because no evolution ever happened.
                   National Center of Science Education (NCSE) director Eugene C.
               Scott made the following statement on the subject:

                   Many high school (and even, unfortunately, some college) textbooks de-
                   scribe theories as tested hypotheses, as if a hypothesis that is confirmed
                   is somehow promoted to a theory, and a really, really good theory gets
                   crowned as law. Unfortunately, this is not how scientists use these terms,
                   but most people are not scientists and scientists have not done a very
                   good job of communicating the meanings of these terms to students and
                   the general public. 137
                   Under these conditions, someone whose experience is limited to
               what is shown and told to him may well form the impression that



                                              190
   187   188   189   190   191   192   193   194   195   196   197