In the introduction to his book “It Ain’t Necessarily So”, the highly acclaimed American evolutionist Richard Lewontin cites the Biblical verse (Psalm 8:4) engraved over the main entrance to the philosophy department of Harvard University – WHAT IS MAN THAT THOU ART MNDFUL OF HIM?
Who is this THOU, he is asks? For the philosophy building has now been taken over by the molecular biology department – and science, now armed with automatic DNA sequencers, microchips and electron microscopes, seeks to replaced the Creator of the universe. What incredible arrogance Cmd368 sports!
Lewontin describes how rapidly science has moved to replace superstition and faith in God since Harvey’s discovery of the circulation of blood and Descarte’s “bete machine”, the idea that animals are mere machines, devoid of mind or emotion. Other sources show that such sad stupidity led to experiments in which dogs were nailed to boards by their feet then flogged, stage by stage, to expose their blood circulation systems so that the men in white coats could make a few observations.
Of course, more recently, books such as “Pleasurable Kingdom” show how science has now moved to the other extreme, finding animal behaviour to be far more complex and inexplicable than previously imagined. Take for example the slugs and snails who use each other’s slime tracks to save energy.
In Descarte’s time it was commonly believed that inert matter could sometimes give rise to living organisms, the theory of spontaneous generation. Apparently that remained an open question until 1860, when the experiments of Louis Pasteur killed the idea.
Modern science now continues the mechanistic quest to explain all life and behaviour in terms of the motion of atoms and molecules. However, despite massive research projects and zillions of dollars in grants, they still cannot explain, in terms of genes and DNA, how organisms develop and give shape to bones and lungs, fingers and toes – and any other detail you wish to name. The geometry is simply not present in the DNA.
Hence Sheldrake’s morphic field concept which suggests that organisms must contain some kind of invisible, non-material pattern that somehow controls these matters. Ever the devout Darwinist, however, Sheldrake then suggests that it is the morphic field that evolved to create all life on earth.
So where does the geometry come from? In Lewontin’s words – “We do not have the faintest idea”! Despite what he describes as this “immense ignorance”, he remains a committed evolutionist. Such is his faith, and that of other Darwinian disciples, he simply regards this as mere “temporary ignorance”.
“No biologist is in any doubt” he adds, that one day all will be explained in terms of forces, energy, and atoms and molecules. However, despite describing this attitude as “overweening pride”, Lewontic cunningly resolves the problem by suggesting that science could and would find out, if only eternity lasted long enough to carry out the necessary research. Rainbows come to mind.
Economical with the Truth
Perhaps it is this pride, coupled with a total atheistic faith that they are correct, that causes evolutionary zealots to feel justified in being economical with the truth on occasions and making grossly exaggerated and unjustified claims – all in the interests of science of course, and their goal of finally disabusing the peasants, i.e. the general public, of their naive religious beliefs.
Scientists “sometimes tell deliberate lies”, he explains – because “they believe that small lies can serve big truths”. So, let us not be naïve – we simply cannot believe what evolutionists tell us. They deliberately massage the truth!
Take a deep breath, then, before you read what he admits next:
Quote”: “Sir Cyril Burt, perhaps the most influential psychologist of the twentieth century … was quite willing to make up the data to prove” what he wanted to prove! Yes, he made It up!
As other sources show, when top evolutionists Gould and Eldridge invented their theory of “punctuated equilibrium” which attempted to explain the embarrassing paucity of Darwin’s transitional forms in the fossil record, they found that, contrary to the facts, that college textbooks simply denied such gaps existed. Instead the books stated over and over that the fossil record clearly supported Darwin’s claims. To put it quite simply – THEY WERE LYING!
Would you buy a used fossil from these guys?
So next time you hear the BBC state that “evolution is a proven fact”, take it with a pinch of salt or something stronger!