{ Science Truth...Assume Nothing }

Science and Evolution Essays (Essay links below.)

Nobel prize winning scientist Christian de Duve says in his book Life Evolving says, "Scientific inquiry rests on the notion that all manifestations in the universe are explainable in natural terms without supernatural intervention. Strictly speaking, this notion is not an a priori philosophical stand or profession of belief. It is a postulate which we should be ready to abandon if faced with facts which defy every attempt at rational explanation."

The reality is that the majority of those whose professional income is tied to the Macro evolution Darwinian dogma, will not even open their minds to think about the possibility that a design explanation is possible even in the face of the extreme improbabilities demonstrated by the facts of life's incredible complexities.

This writer believes, actually, that it is possible that God, acting in a time frame outside this universe, could have designed the laws of physics so as to require minimal or no direct intervention to generate life of fairly specific forms. The actual evidence, however, clearly indicates something more than setting up the laws of physics and starting the universe running is almost certainly required. There is no a priori reason to believe that there can be nothing other than selection from random variations determining the evolution of life forms and actually good reasons to believe that there is far more to the evolution of life than simple Darwinism.

We object to the teaching of Darwin macro evolution as fact and the unscientific spirit of the unwillingness to even consider other possibilities just because they might have religious implications. In virtually all other scientific endeavors, simply saying "must have been" is not an acceptable way to analyze data and then teach such as the unquestionable truth. We should be teaching our children to think, not to simply accept dogmatic proclamations and not to make logical leaps without the full realization of what errors in thinking and conclusion such leaps can lead to.

We believe that these views given in the essays are at least as rational as macro evolution Darwinian dogma (which is not supported by direct testing (showing true novelty and discontinuity bridging via small step Darwinism) in any substantial way) and at least justify considering that Darwinian dogma is probably in error in claiming that it is more than a fine tuning mechanism and in error in taking the stand that nothing more than Darwinian evolution is needed to explain all of life. The dogmatic stance of the Darwin community is not based on any unquestionable science fact but rather on a philosophy which refuses to consider any other possibility. Sadly, that philosophy has been imposed on all in the community who are dependent on it for their profession and associated income and research funding.

There are, however, a growing number of scientists raising questions which cannot be answered by Darwinism. The scientist who wrote one of the mainline books on evolution "Biochemical predestination (written by Dr. D. Kenyon, Doctorate in biophysics and professor of biology at S.F. State University in Calif.) through his studies has come to believe that Darwinism cannot be the full explanation and that design of some type must also be involved in evolution.

Our views on evolution

Biological Science Credentials of some Creation Scientists

Physical Science Credentials of some Creation Scientists

What we believe macro evolutionists fail to grasp

Possible alternatives to Darwinian Macro-Evolution

What a real proof of Darwinian Macro-Evolution would look like if it were possible

Evidence which would tend to disprove Darwinian Macro-Evolution

A world where complex life fills virtually niche

The teaching of evolution

Questions for students to ask evolution teachers

Our beliefs about the origin & evolution of life