Changes
better wikilink
[[Image:Evolution.jpg|alt=evolution darwin theory|right|thumb|226px200px|Late in [[Charles Darwin|Charles Darwin's]] life, Darwin told the Duke of Argyll that he frequently had overwhelming thoughts that the natural world was the [[Intelligent design|result of design]].<ref>http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/teleological-arguments/notes.html</ref> See also: [http://creation.com/15-questions 15 questions for evolutionists] ]]
The theory of '''evolution''' is a [[Naturalism|naturalistic]] [[theory]] of the [[history]] of life on earth (this refers to the theory of evolution which employs [[methodological naturalism]] and is taught in schools and universities). Merriam-Webster's dictionary gives the following [[definition of evolution]]: "a theory that the various types of animals and plants have their origin in other preexisting types and that the distinguishable differences are due to modifications in successive generations..."<ref>[http://www.m-w.com/dictionary/evolution Merriam-Webster's Online Dictionary, Definition for "evolution"]</ref> Currently, there are several [[theories of evolution]].
Since [[World War II]] a majority of the most prominent and vocal defenders of the evolutionary position which employs methodological naturalism have been [[Atheism|atheists]] and [[agnosticism|agnostics]] (see also: [[Causes of evolutionary belief]]).<ref>
* Dr. Don Batten, [http://creation.com/a-whos-who-of-evolutionists A ''Who’s Who'' of evolutionists] ''Creation'' 20(1):32, December 1997.
* [[Jonathan Sarfati]], Ph.D.,F.M., [http://www.creation.com/content/view/3830 ''Refuting Evolution'', Chapter 1, Facts and Bias]
In 2011, the results of a study was published indicating that most [[United States]] high school biology teachers are reluctant to endorse the theory of evolution in class. <ref>http://voices.washingtonpost.com/answer-sheet/science/study-most-high-school-biology.html</ref> In addition, in 2011, eight anti-evolution bills were introduced into state legislatures within the United States encouraging students to employ [[critical thinking]] skills when examining the evolutionary [[paradigm]]. In 2009, there were seven states which required critical analysis skills be employed when examining evolutionary material within schools.<ref>http://www.discovery.org/a/9851</ref>
A 2005 poll by the Louis Finkelstein Institute for Social and Religious Research found that 60% of [[United States|American]] medical doctors reject [[Darwinism]], stating that they do not believe man evolved through natural processes alone.<ref>[http://www.discovery.org/a/2611 Nearly Two-Thirds of Doctors Skeptical of Darwin’s Theory of Evolution]</ref> Thirty-eight percent of the American medical doctors polled agreed with the statement that "Humans evolved naturally with no supernatural involvement." <ref>[http://www.discovery.org/a/2611 Nearly Two-Thirds of Doctors Skeptical of Darwin’s Theory of Evolution]</ref> The study also reported that 1/3 of all medical doctors favor the theory of [[Intelligent design|intelligent design]] over evolution.<ref>[http://www.discovery.org/a/2611 Nearly Two-Thirds of Doctors Skeptical of Darwin’s Theory of Evolution]</ref> In 2010, the [[Gallup Poll|Gallup organization ]] reported that 40% of Americans believe in [[young earth creationism]].<ref>http://www.gallup.com/poll/145286/Four-Americans-Believe-Strict-Creationism.aspx</ref> In January 2006, the [[BBC]] reported concerning [[Britain]]:
{{cquote|Just under half of Britons accept the theory of evolution as the best description for the development of life, according to an opinion poll.
Furthermore, more than 40% of those questioned believe that [[creationism]] or intelligent design (ID) should be taught in school science lessons.<ref>http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/4648598.stm</ref>}}
[[File:View from Levering Plaza.jpg|thumbnail|left|250px200px|''Johns Hopkins University Press '' reported in 2014: "Over the past forty years, [[creationism]] has spread swiftly among European Catholics, Protestants, Jews, Hindus, and Muslims, even as anti-creationists sought to smother its flames."<ref>[https://jhupbooks.press.jhu.edu/content/creationism-europe Creationism spreading in Europe]</ref>
<br /><br />
<small>Picture above was taken at Johns Hopkins University</small>]]
[[Johns Hopkins University]] Press reported in 2014: "Over the past forty years, [[creationism]] has spread swiftly among European Catholics, Protestants, Jews, Hindus, and Muslims, even as anti-creationists sought to smother its flames."<ref>[httphttps://questionevolutionjhupbooks.blogspotpress.com/2015jhu.edu/03content/johnscreationism-hopkins-university-press-reported.html europe Creationism spreading in Europe]</ref> See In addition, [[China]] has the world's largest [[Atheist Population|atheist population]] and the rapid growth of biblical [[creationism]]/[[Evangelical Christianity|Evangelical Christianity]] in China may have a significant impact on the number of individuals in the world who believe in evolution and alsoon [[global atheism]] (see: [[Evolutionary indoctrinationChina and biblical creationism]]and [[Asian atheism]]).
The theory of evolution posits a process of transformation from simple life forms to more complex life forms, which has never been observed or duplicated in a laboratory.<ref>*Russell Grigg and Dr. [[Jonathan Sarfati]], [http://www.creation.com/content/view/4280 Intelligent Design—‘A War on Science’ says the BBC]]</ref><ref>*Paul McHugh, [http://www.discovery.org/scripts/viewDB/index.php?command=view&id=2477 The Weekly Standard, Teaching Darwin: Why we're still fighting about biology textbook. March 28, 2005]</ref> Although not a [[creation science|creation scientist]], Swedish [[genetics|geneticist]] Dr. [[Nils Heribert-Nilsson]], Professor of Botany at the University of Lund in [[Sweden]] and a member of the Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences, stated: "My attempts to demonstrate Evolution by an experiment carried on for more than 40 years have completely failed. At least, I should hardly be accused of having started from a preconceived antievolutionary standpoint."<ref>*[http://www.custance.org/Library/Volume4/Part_I/chapter6.html Nilsson, Heribert, Synthetische Artbildung, Verlag CWK Gleerup, Lund, Sweden, 1953, page 1185]</ref><ref>*[http://creation.com/gould-and-heribert-nilsson Quotes to note]</ref>
The fossil record is often used as evidence in the [[creation]] versus evolution controversy. The [[fossil]] record does not support the theory of evolution and is one of the flaws in the theory of evolution.<ref>
* [http://creation.com/content/view/5654 Ediacaran ‘explosion’]
</ref> In 1981, there were at least a hundred million fossils that were catalogued and identified in the world's museums.<ref>[http://www.fossils.me/tag/darwinism Porter Kier, quoted in New Scientist, January 15, 1981, p. 129]</ref> Despite the large number of fossils available to scientists in 1981, evolutionist Mark Ridley, who currently serves as a professor of zoology at [[Oxford University]], was forced to confess: "In any case, no real evolutionist, whether gradualist or [[Punctuated Equilibrium|punctuationist]], uses the fossil record as evidence in favour of the theory of evolution as opposed to [[Creationism|special creation]]."<ref>Mark Ridley, 'Who doubts evolution?', New Scientist, vol. 90, 25 June 1981, p. 831</ref>
[[Image:Intelligent design.jpg|thumbnail|300px200px|right|When [[Richard Dawkins]] was a young man, he recognized [[Intelligent design|that the complexity of life indicates a designer]]. ]]
In addition to the evolutionary position lacking evidential support and being counterevidential, the great intellectuals in history such as [[Archimedes]], [[Aristotle]], [[St. Augustine]], [[Francis Bacon]], [[Isaac Newton]], and [[Lord Kelvin]] did not propose an evolutionary process for a species to transform into a more complex version. Even after the theory of evolution was proposed and promoted heavily in England and Germany, most leading scientists were against the theory of evolution.<ref>
* Dr. John Ankerberg and Dr. John Weldon, [http://www.johnankerberg.com/Articles/_PDFArchives/science/SC1W0104D.pdf Darwin, Evolution, and His Critics - Part 3, How Was Darwin's Theory of Evolution First Received]
== Belief in evolution and intuition ==
In 2012, the science news website Livescience.com published a news article entitled ''Belief in Evolution Boils Down to a Gut Feeling'' which indicated that research suggests that gut feelings trumped facts when it comes to evolutionists believing in evolution.<ref>[http://www.livescience.com/18051-belief-evolution-gut-feeling.html Belief in Evolution Boils Down to a Gut Feeling] by Live Science Staff, January 20, 2012 04:31pm ET</ref> In January of 2012, the ''Journal of Research in Science Teaching'' published a study indicating that evolutionary belief is significantly based on gut feelings.<ref>[http://www.livescience.com/18051-belief-evolution-gut-feeling.html Belief in Evolution Boils Down to a Gut Feeling]</ref><ref>[http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/tea.20449/abstract Feeling of Certainty: Uncovering a Missing Link Between Knowledge and Acceptance of Evolution]</ref> A The January 20, 2012 article entitled ''Belief in Evolution Boils Down to a Gut Feeling'' published by the website Live Science wrote of the research: "They found that intuition had a significant impact on what the students accepted, no matter how much they knew and regardless of their religious beliefs."<ref>[http://www.livescience.com/18051-belief-evolution-gut-feeling.html Belief in Evolution Boils Down to a Gut Feeling]</ref>
In May response to [[evolutionary indoctrination]] and the uncritical acceptance of 2011evolution by many evolutionists, the scientists at the organization [[Creation Ministries International]] launched the created a [[Question evolution! campaign|Question evolution! campaign]] which is a [[grassroots]] campaign encouraging students and others to "question the evolutionary [[pseudoscience]] peddled to them". The focus of the Question evolution! campaign is on 15 questions that evolutionists cannot answer. (see: poses [http://creation.com/15-questions 15 questions that for evolutionists cannot satisfactorily answer]). In addition, leading creationist organizations have created lists of poor arguments that evolutionists should not use.<ref>*[http://creation.com/questionarguments-evolutionists-should-not-use Arguments evolutionists should not use] by Creation Ministries International *[https://answersingenesis.org/theory-of-evolution Question evolution! campaign/12-arguments-evolutionists-should-avoid/ 12 Arguments Evolutionists Should Avoid]by Answers in Genesis</ref>See also: [[Causes of evolutionary belief]]
== Theory of Evolution - Mutations and the Life Sciences in General ==
Evolutionist [[Theodosius Dobzhansky]] wrote concerning the theory of evolution: "The process of [[mutation]] is the only known source of the new materials of genetic variability, and hence of evolution."<ref>NorthWest Creation Network, [http://www.nwcreation.net/geneticquotes.html Quotes on Genetics]</ref> Concerning various [[theories of evolution]], most evolutionists believe that the processes of mutation, [[genetic drift]] and natural selection created every species of life that we see on earth today after [[Origin of Life|life first came about on earth]] although [[Theory of evolution and little consensus|there is little consensus on how this process is allegedly to have occurred]].<ref>[[Jonathan Sarfati]], P.H.D., F.M., [http://www.creation.com/content/view/1855 Climbing Mount Improbable:A Review of Climbing Mount Improbable by Richard Dawkins]</ref>
[[Pierre-Paul Grassé]], who served as Chair of evolutionary [[biology]] at Sorbonne University for thirty years and was ex-president of the French Academy of Sciences, stated the following: "Some contemporary biologists, as soon as they observe a mutation, talk about evolution. They are implicitly supporting the following syllogism: mutations are the only evolutionary variations, all living beings undergo mutations, therefore all living beings evolve....No matter how numerous they may be, mutations do not produce any kind of evolution." Grassé pointed out that bacteria which are the subject of study of many geneticists and molecular biologists are organisms which produce the most mutants.<ref>[http://www.veritas-ucsb.org/library/origins/quotes/mutations.html Pierre-Paul Grassé regarding mutations]</ref> Grasse then points that bacteria are considered to have "stabilized".<ref>[http://www.veritas-ucsb.org/library/origins/quotes/mutations.html Pierre-Paul Grassé regarding mutations]</ref> Grassé regards the "unceasing mutations" to be "merely hereditary fluctuations around a median position; a swing to the right, a swing to the left, but no final evolutionary effect."<ref>[ http://www.veritas-ucsb.org/library/origins/quotes/mutations.html Pierre-Paul Grassé regarding mutations]</ref>
In addition, [[Harvard]] biologist [[Ernst Mayr]] wrote: "It must be admitted, however, that it is a considerable strain on one’s credulity to assume that finely balanced systems such as certain sense organs (the eye of vertebrates, or the bird’s feather) could be improved by random mutations."<ref>[http://www.creationscience.com/onlinebook/ReferencesandNotes9.html Ernst Mayr, Systematics and the Origin of Species (New York: Dover Publications, 1942), p. 296]</ref>
== Evolutionary Theory and Cases of Fraud, Hoaxes and Speculation ==
[[Image:Haeckel.jpg|right|170px|thumb|[[Ernst Haeckel]]]]
:''See also: [[Evolution and Cases of Fraud, Hoaxes and Speculation]]'' and [[Atheism and deception]] and [[Theories of evolution]] and [[Evolution and just so stories]]
A notable case of a scientists using fraudulent material to promote the theory of evolution was the work of German scientist and [[atheism|atheist]] [[Ernst Haeckel]]. Noted evolutionist and [[Stephen Gould]], who held a [[agnostic|agnostic]] worldview<ref>http://www.billmuehlenberg.com/2007/03/20/a-review-of-the-dawkins-delusion-by-alister-mcgrath/</ref> and promoted the notion of [[Non-Overlapping Magisteria|non-overlapping magesteria]], wrote the following regarding Ernst Haeckel's work in a March 2000 issue of ''Natural History'':
As alluded to earlier, today there are over one hundred million identified and cataloged [[fossils]] in the world's museums.<ref>[http://www.halos.com/printer.htm?page=/book/ctm-07-e.htm Creation's Tiny Mystery: Chapter 7: Creation Science—a Public Issue]</ref> If the evolutionary position was valid, then there should be "transitional forms" in the fossil record reflecting the intermediate life forms. Another term for these "transitional forms" is "missing links".
[[File:Darwin.jpg|alt=charles darwin's theory of evolution|right|thumb|225px205px|[[Charles Darwin]] wrote: "When we descend to details, we cannot prove that a single species has changed; nor can we prove that the supposed changes are beneficial, which is the groundwork of the theory.”<ref>Dr. [[Walt Brown]], Center for Scientific Creationism, [http://www.creationscience.com/onlinebook/ReferencesandNotes12.html References and Notes: Distinct Types]</ref> ]]
Charles Darwin admitted that his theory required the existence of "transitional forms." Darwin wrote: "So that the number of intermediate and transitional links, between all living and extinct species, must have been inconceivably great. But assuredly, if this theory be true, such have lived upon the earth."<ref>[http://www.thedarwinpapers.com/oldsite/number5/darwin5.htm THE DARWIN PAPERS, VOLUME 1, NUMBER V, FOSSILS: HISTORY WRITTEN IN STONE]</ref> However, Darwin wrote: "Why then is not every geological formation and every strata full of such intermediate links? [[Geology]] assuredly does not reveal any such finely-graduated organic chain; and this perhaps, is the most obvious and serious objection which can be urged against my theory."<ref>[http://www.veritas-ucsb.org/library/origins/quotes/Discontinuties.html NATURAL DISCONTINUITIES AND THE FOSSIL RECORD]</ref> Darwin thought the lack of transitional links in his time was because "only a small portion of the surface of the earth has been geologically explored and no part with sufficient care...".<ref>[[Charles Darwin]], ''Origin of the Species'', [http://www.darwin-literature.com/The_Origin_of_Species/10.html Chapter X: ON THE IMPERFECTION OF THE GEOLOGICAL RECORD]</ref> As Charles Darwin grew older he became increasingly concerned about the lack of evidence for the theory of evolution in terms of the existence of transitional forms. Darwin wrote, "“When we descend to details, we cannot prove that a single species has changed; nor can we prove that the supposed changes are beneficial, which is the groundwork of the theory.”<ref>Dr. [[Walt Brown]], Center for Scientific Creationism, [http://www.creationscience.com/onlinebook/ReferencesandNotes12.html References and Notes: Distinct Types]</ref>
== Evolution and the second law of thermodynamics ==
[[Image:Jonathansafarti.jpg|thumbnail|right|250px200px|right|[[Jonathan Sarfati]] ]]
''See also:'' [[Creation Ministries International on the second law of thermodynamics|Creation Ministries International on the second law of thermodynamics and evolution]]
== Implausible Explanations and the Evolutionary Position==
[[Image:Feather image.jpg|thumb|300px200px|left|[[Harvard]] biologist [[Ernst Mayr]] wrote: "It must be admitted, however, that it is a considerable strain on one’s credulity to assume that finely balanced systems such as certain sense organs (the eye of vertebrates, or the bird’s feather) could be improved by random [[mutation]]s."<ref>[http://www.creationscience.com/onlinebook/ReferencesandNotes9.html Ernst Mayr, Systematics and the Origin of Species (New York: Dover Publications, 1942), p. 296]</ref>]]
Individuals who are against the evolutionary position assert that evolutionary scientists employ extremely implausible "just so stories" to support their position and have done this since at least the time of Charles Darwin.<ref>http://www.uncommondescent.com/intelligent-design/two-just-so-stories/</ref>
<ref>http://darwinstories.blogspot.com/</ref>
== Statements of Design ==
:''See main article:'' [[Intelligent design]] and [[Argument from beauty]] and [[Atheists doubting the validity of atheism]]
[[File:Autumn.jpg|291px201px|right|thumbnail|[[Autumn]] foliage is one of the many of examples of beauty in [[God]]'s [[creation]]. See also: [[Argument from beauty]] <br /><br /><small>([http://www.flickr.com/photos/universalpops/5236103680/ Flickr] picture, see:'' [http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/2.0/deed.en license agreement])</small>]]
[[Phillip E. Johnson]] cites [[Francis Crick]] in order to illustrate the fact that the biological world has the strong appearance of being designed:
{{cquote|"One of the world's most famous scientists, probably the most famous living biologist, is Sir [[Francis Crick]], the British co-discoverer of the structure of DNA, a Nobel Prize winner... Crick is also a fervent atheistic [[materialism|materialist]], who propounds the particle story. In his autobiography, Crick says very candidly biologists must remind themselves daily that what they study was not created, it evolved; it was not designed, it evolved. Why do they have to remind themselves of that? Because otherwise, the facts which are staring them in the face and trying to get their attention might break through. What we discovered when I developed a working group of scientists, philosophers, et al., in the United States was that living organisms look as if they were designed and they look that way because that is exactly what they are." - Evolution And Christian Faith by [[Phillip E. Johnson]]<ref>http://www.ldolphin.org/ntcreation.html</ref>}}
{{cquote|"During the last forty years, [[molecular biology]] has revealed a complexity and intricacy of design that exceeds anything that was imaginable during the late-nineteenth century. We now know that organisms display any number of distinctive features of intelligently engineered high-tech systems: information storage and transfer capability; functioning codes; sorting and delivery systems; regulatory and feed-back loops; signal transduction circuitry; and everywhere, complex, mutually-interdependent networks of parts. Indeed, the complexity of the biomacromolecules discussed in this essay does not begin to exhaust the full complexity of living systems. As even the staunch materialist [[Richard Dawkins]] has allowed, "Biology is the study of complicated things that give the appearance of having been designed for a purpose." Yet the materialistic science we have inherited from the late-nineteenth century, with its exclusive conceptual reliance on matter and energy, could neither envision nor can it now account for the biology of the information age." - The Origin of Life and the Death of Materialism by [[Stephen C. Meyer]], Ph.D.<ref>http://www.arn.org/docs/meyer/sm_origins.htm</ref>}}
[[File:Darwin monkey cartoon.jpg|left|thumbnail|150px|Caricature of [[Charles Darwin]] ]]
The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy states the following regarding a candid admission of Charles Darwin:
{{cquote|In 1885, the Duke of Argyll recounted a conversation he had had with Charles Darwin the year before Darwin's death:
''See also:'' [[Suppression of alternatives to evolution]] and [[Atheism and the suppression of science]]
Many of the leaders of the atheist movement, such as the evolutionist and the [[New Atheism|new atheist ]] [[Richard Dawkins]], argue for [[atheism]] and evolution with a religious fervor(See also: [[Atheism and evolution]]).
Daniel Smartt has identified seven dimensions which make up religion: narrative, experiential, social, ethical, doctrinal, ritual and material. It is not necessary in Smartt's model for every one of these to be present in order for something to be a religion.<ref>[http://creation.com/atheism-a-religion "Atheism: A religion"], Daniel Smartt, Creation.com</ref>. However, it can be argued that all seven are present in the case of atheism.<ref>[http://creation.com/atheism-a-religion Atheism: A religion]</ref><ref>[http://creation.com/atheism Atheism]</ref> Please see: [http://creation.com/atheism-a-religion Atheism: A religion]and [http://creation.com/atheism Atheism] and [[Atheism is a religion]].
=== Atheism is a religion and its legal implications as far as the teaching of evolution ===
''See also:'' [[Atheism is a religion]] and [[Atheism and evolution]][[File:Paul gosselin.JPG|thumbnail|right|275px200px|The Canadian [[anthropology|anthropologist]] [[Paul Gosselin]] points out that evolution is a [[secular]] origins [[myth]].<ref>[http://www.samizdat.qc.ca/cosmos/origines/myth.htm Myths of Origin and the Theory of Evolution]</ref> See: [[Evolution as a secular origins myth]] ]]
[[Atheism is a religion]] and [[Naturalism (philosophy)|naturalistic]] notions concerning origins are religious in nature and both have legal implications as far as evolution being taught in public schools.<ref>http://creation.com/atheism-a-religion</ref><ref>http://www.intelligentdesignnetwork.org/Kitzmiller%27s_error_summary.pdf</ref><ref>http://www.intelligentdesignnetwork.org/Kitzmiller%27s_Error.pdf</ref>
{{cquote|The Seventh Judicial Circuit of the Court of Appeals of the [[United States]] held that atheism is a [[religion]]. Therefore, it cannot be promoted by a public school. Currently, public schools are often unwittingly promoting atheism through a dogmatic and uncritical teaching of materialistic theories of origins.<ref>[http://shockawenow.blogspot.com/2011/08/intelligent-design-leader-john-calvert.html The effects of the Question Evolution! Campaign will be devastating to evolutionary belief and atheism]</ref>}}
See also: *[[Evolution as a secular origins myth]]
*[[Evolution, Liberalism, Atheism, and Irrationality]]
*[[Creation vs. evolution debates|Creation scientists tend to win the creation vs. evolution debates]]
*[[Atheism and deception]]
The [[religion]] of [[evolutionism]] is contrary to [[creationism]].<ref>[http://creation.com/15-questions 15 questions for evolutionists - Question 15 deals with the fact that evolution is a religion]</ref>
== Effect on Scientific Endeavors Outside the Specific Field of Biology ==
* [http://creation.com/the-origin-of-life-a-problem-for-evolution Origin of life - a problem for evolution]
* http://www.britannica.com/eb/article-9057170/Oparin,%20Aleksandr
</ref> However, the current [[origin of life|naturalistic explanations for the origin of life are inadequate]].<br />The theory of evolution is incomplete without an understanding of Some evolutionists try to claim that the origin of life. Modern science has been unable to discern how life could have arisen naturally. A survey of the genetic code of life reveals that all life on Earth uses the same twenty [[Amino acid|amino acids]] and the same coding system. This code uses is not a four letter system where groups part of three form [[codon|codons]] which instruct the cell which amino acid to addevolutionary paradigm, and in what order, for the construction of a protein. Since there are four possible letters and three per codon but this equates to sixty-four possible codons. Because three of these are used as stop commands, is not the remaining sixty-one codons each call for an amino acid with some overlap in amino acid assignmentcase (see: [https://creation.<br com/>It has been pointed out that a few forms origin-of life have slightly different codings by repurposing one of the stop commands to code for an amino acid. In most cases this allows the organism to evade the defenses of a host that it infects. Now these non-standard codes are obvious degenerate forms that have mutated from the original code.<br />In the book, ''Designed to Evolve'', the following case is made: If the genetic code of life evolved from simpler forms, we would expect that there would be more variance in the genetic code. These degenerate forms Origin of the code in some lifeforms indicate that the code could have been written differently. But the pattern of variance is what would be expected if the common code was the starting point and the alternate forms being mutations from the common. Furthermore, if the common code evolved from a simpler code, then there should be more variance in the genetic code. As it is, the genetic code represents a strong intelligent design signal that is written in the genomes of all life on Earth]).<ref>http://www.designed2evolve.com</ref>
== Richard Dawkins and evolutionary quackery ==
== Social Effects of the Theory of Evolution ==
''For more information please see: [[Social effects of the theory of evolution]] and [[Evolutionary racism]] and [[Atheism and Evolution]] and [[World War I and Darwinism]] and [[Atheism, evolution and morality]] and [[Irreligion/religion and war/peace]]''
=== Evolution and Nazism ===
[[Image:Hitlerspeech.jpg|thumb|300px200px|right|[[Adolf Hitler]]]]
''See also:'' [[World War I and Darwinism]] and [[Irreligion/religion and war/peace]]
The staunch evolutionist [[Stephen Gould]] admitted the following:
Kanazawa has a "Savanna principle" hypothesis which speculates that societal problems are due to the human brain supposedly evolving in Africa hundreds of thousands of years ago in a very different environment from modern society.<ref>http://www.psychologytoday.com/node/38933</ref>
=== Darwinism and brutality in war ===
==Creation Scientists Tend to Win the Creation-Evolution Debates==
[[Image:Duanegishpic.jpg|thumb|150px|right|Dr. [[Duane Gish]]]]
:''For additional information please see the article: [[Atheism and Debate]]'' and [[Atheism and deception]] and [[Creation scientists tend to win the creation vs. evolution debates]] and [[Atheism and cowardice]] Creation scientists tend to win the Creation-Evolution debates and many have been held since the 1970's particularly in the [[United States]] (see: [[Creation vs. evolution debates]]).
In August of 1979, [[Henry Morris|Dr. Henry Morris]] reported in an [[Institute for Creation Research]] letter the following: “By now, practically every leading evolutionary scientist in this country has declined one or more invitations to a scientific debate on creation/evolution.”
Morris also said regarding the creation scientist [[Duane Gish]] (who had over 300 formal debates): “At least in our judgment and that of most in the audiences, he always wins.”<ref>[http://www.ankerberg.com/Articles/science/SC1200W1.htm Voices for evolution - John Ankerberg website]</ref><ref>[http://www.ankerberg.com/Articles/science/SC1200W1.htm Voices for evolution - John Ankerberg website]</ref>
Generally speaking, [[Atheism and Debate|leading evolutionists no longer debate creation scientists]] because [[creation scientists tend to win the creation vs. evolution debates (see: [[Creation vs. evolution debates]]).<ref>http://www.icr.org/article/811/</ref> Also, the [[atheism|atheist]] and evolutionist [[Richard Dawkins]] has shown inconsistent and deceptive behavior [[Richard Dawkins' public refusal to debate creationists|concerning his refusal creation scientists]]. Evolutionists and atheists inconsistency concerning debating creationists was commented on by the [[Christian apologetics|Christian apologetic]] website [[True Free Thinker]] which declared: "Interestingly enough, having noted that since some atheists refuse to debate “creationists” but then go on to debate some of those people but not others, it is clear that they are, in reality, being selective and making excuses for absconding from difficulties..."<ref>http://www.truefreethinker.com/articles/speaking-assiduous-absconders%E2%80%A6yet-again-vox-day-challenges-pz-myers-debate</ref>
==Theory of Evolution, Liberalism, Atheism, and Irrationality ==
*[[Suppression of alternatives to evolution]]
*[[Atheism, naturalism and the origin of the universe]]
*[[List of atheist and agnostic pseudosciences]]
*[[Creation vs. Evolution Videos]]
*[[Global creationismAtheists and supernatural beliefs]]*[[Atheism and Evolution articles]]*[[Origin of life]]*[[Atheism]]*[[Creation]]
*[[Rebuttals to atheist arguments]]
*[[Atheism and deception]]
*[[Christianity and Science]]
*[[Counterexamples to Evolution]]*[[Creation Science]]*[[Comedy Atheism and satires concerning atheism and evolution]]*[[Evolutionismscience]]
*[[Evolution quotes]]
*[[General theory of evolutionEvolution articles]]*[[Essay: Atheism Atheists and evolution essays|Atheism and evolution essaysgenetic mutations]]
==External Links and other links ==
