Posted in Creation & Evolution, Education Quotes, Subject Bible & Theology, Subject Science

Creation and Evolution Quotes

For an excellent discussion of “early hominids,” read the book “Buried Alive” by Jack Cuozzo.

~

Evolution, Education and Fraud:

On January 15, 2012, the British Department of Education is reported by Dominic Statham and Philip Bell in “Dawkins gloats over boost to evolutionary dogma in schools: Another hollow victory for educational censorship,” Creation Ministries International, January 21, 2012 here: http://creation.com/dawkins-bha-schools-creation to have

revised its model funding agreement … [so that] … funding will be withdrawn from any free school that teaches what it claims are ‘evidence-based views or theories’ that run ‘contrary to established scientific and/or historical evidence and explanations’ [i.e. evolutionary dogma].” This, in turn, “has been seized upon by anti-creationists who are pressing for wider concessions from the government” (emphasis added).

Eugenie Scott, Ph.D., founder and Director of National Center for Science Education, in “Evolutionist: it’s OK to deceive students to believe evolution” by Jonathan Sarfati, Published: 24 September 2008(GMT+10), available at http://creation.com/evolutionist-its-ok-to-deceive-students-to-believe-evolution:

In my opinion, using creation and evolution as topics for critical-thinking exercises in primary and secondary schools is virtually guaranteed to confuse students about evolution and may lead them to reject one of the major themes in science.

Bora Zivkovic, Online Community Manager at PLoS-ONE, in “Evolutionist: it’s OK to deceive students to believe evolution” by Jonathan Sarfati, Published: 24 September 2008(GMT+10), available at http://creation.com/evolutionist-its-ok-to-deceive-students-to-believe-evolution:

‘it is OK to use some inaccuracies temporarily if they help you reach the students.’ (Zivkovic, Bora (aka “Coturnix”), Why teaching evolution is dangerous, <scienceblogs.com> 25 August 2008).

‘You cannot bludgeon kids with truth (or insult their religion, i.e., their parents and friends) and hope they will smile and believe you. Yes, NOMA is wrong, but is a good first tool for gaining trust. You have to bring them over to your side, gain their trust, and then hold their hands and help them step by step. And on that slow journey, which will be painful for many of them, it is OK to use some inaccuracies temporarily if they help you reach the students. (emphasis added)’

‘If a student, like Natalie Wright who I quoted above, goes on to study biology, then he or she will unlearn the inaccuracies in time. If most of the students do not, but those cutesy examples help them accept evolution, then it is OK if they keep some of those little inaccuracies for the rest of their lives. It is perfectly fine if they keep thinking that Mickey Mouse evolved as long as they think evolution is fine and dandy overall. Without Mickey, they may have become Creationist activists instead. Without belief in NOMA they would have never accepted anything, and well, so be it. Better NOMA-believers than Creationists, don’t you think?’

‘Education is a subversive activity that is implicitly in place in order to counter the prevailing culture. And the prevailing culture in the case of Campbell’s school, and many other schools in the country, is a deeply conservative religious culture.’

From the DVD, “Icons of Evolution,” Jonathon Wells, The Discovery Institute, 2002:

It’s clear that Haeckel may have fudged his drawings somewhat to look more like his ideal than they actually are. Now, does that actually take away from what we know about the relationship of embryology to evolution? Not a bit. The whole Haeckel’s embryo story has been greatly blown out of significance. It is a minor footnote in the history of science, and actually it’s been known for ten or fifteen years that Haeckel’s embryos are not to be relied upon. The reason why the diagrams are reproduced is because they’re easily available. There’s no copyright on them. It’s an easy way to illustrate a point. And I would argue that the basic point that’s being illustrated by those drawings is still accurate.

Evolution, Lack of evidence and Philosophical Insurmountabilities:

Malcolm Muggeridge, journalist and philosopher:

“I myself am convinced that the theory of evolution, especially the extent to which it’s been applied, will be one of the great jokes in the history books of the future. Posterity will marvel that so very flimsy and dubious an hypothesis could be accepted with the incredible credulity that it has.” (source)

Evolutionary microbiologist James Shapiro of the University of Chicago:

“There are no detailed Darwinian accounts for the evolution of any fundamental biochemical or cellular systems, only a variety of wishful speculations.”

N. A. Takahata, “Genetic Perspective on the Origin and History of Humans,” Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics (vol. 26, 1995), p. 343:

“Even with DNA sequence data, we have no direct access to the processes of evolution, so objective reconstruction of the vanished past can be achieved only by creative imagination.”

German Jewish-Christian philosopher Ludwig Wittgenstein (26 April 1889–29 April 1951) in “Ludwig Wittgenstein: Darwin doubter” by Jerry Bergman, Published: 31 May 2011, available at http://creation.com/ludwig-wittgenstein-darwin-doubter:

I have always thought that Darwin was wrong: his theory doesn’t account for all this variety of species. It hasn’t the necessary multiplicity. Nowadays some people are fond of saying that at last evolution has produced a species that is able to understand the whole process which gave it birth. … you can’t say [that today]. (From Rhees, R. (ed.), Ludwig Wittgenstein: Personal Recollections, Basil Blackwell, Oxford, p. 174, 1981).

Very intelligent and well-educated people believe in the story of creation in the Bible, while others hold it as proven false, and the grounds of the latter are well known to the former” [emphasis in original] (from Anscombe, G.E.M. and von Wright, G.H. (eds.), Ludwig Wittgenstein: On Certainty, Harper & Row, New York, p. 43e, 1972).

D.M.S Watson, leading biologist and science writer of his day, qtd in Refuting Evolution by Jonathan Sarfati, Chapter 1, sample including quote available here: http://austore.creation.com/catalog/pdf/10-2-110.pdf:

Evolution [is] a theory universally acknowledged not because it can be proven by logically coherent evidence to be true, but because the only alternative, special creation, is clearly incredible.

Age of the Earth:

Quote from Guth in “An Ugly Theory Destroyed by a Beautiful Fact“:

“In fact, these defects should have been so numerous and so massive that if they actually existed, the age of the universe “would turn out to be about 10,000 years,” Guth says, with a laugh. “This doesn’t turn out to be the case, scientifically.”  (in post: https://kernelsofwheat.wordpress.com/2014/08/22/about-10000-years/)

Fossil Record:

Dr. Donald Burge, curator of vertebrate paleontology at the College of Eastern Utah Prehistoric Museum:

“We find mammals in almost all of our [dinosaur dig] sites. These were not noticed years ago … . We have about 20,000 pounds of bentonite clay that has mammal fossils that we are trying to give away to some researcher. It’s not that they are not important, it’s just that you only live once and I specialized in something other than mammals. I specialize in reptiles and dinosaurs.”

Evolutionist and Paleontologist Mark Czarnecki:

“A major problem in proving the theory has been the fossil record; the imprints of vanished species preserved in the Earth’s geological formations. This record has never revealed traces of Darwin’s hypothetical intermediate variants – instead species appear and disappear abruptly, and this anomaly has fueled the creationist argument that each species was created by God.” (source)

Richard Dawkins:

“It is as though they [fossils] were just planted there, without any evolutionary history. Needless to say this appearance of sudden planting has delighted creationists. Both schools of thought (Punctuationists and Gradualists) despise so-called scientific creationists equally, and both agree that the major gaps are real, that they are true imperfections in the fossil record. The only alternative explanation of the sudden appearance of so many complex animal types in the Cambrian era is divine creation and both reject this alternative.” (source)

Dr. Etheridge, Paleontologist of the British Museum, qtd in the comment section to the WND article “Voters pick Creation Museum as top destination” by Bob Unruh, May 24, 2012:

Nine-tenths of the talk of evolutionists is sheer nonsense, not founded on observation and wholly unsupported by facts. This museum is full of proofs of the utter falsity of their views. In all this great museum, there is not a particle of evidence of the transmutation of species.

Bryan Fischer:

What the fossil record teaches us, in contrast to the theory of evolution, is that increasingly complex life forms appear fully formed in the fossil record, just as if they were put there by a Creator. This is especially true of what is called the “Pre-Cambrian Explosion,” the vast, overwhelming, and quite sudden appearance of complex life forms at the dawn of time. Evolutionists are at a total loss to explain the Pre-Cambrian Explosion.

The biblical record indicates quite clearly that all things, including increasingly complex life forms, came fully formed from the hand of God.

Thus the fossil record is a powerful argument for the existence of a Creator or Intelligent Designer while at the same time being fatal for the theory of evolution.

Dr. Stephen Jay Gould, famous Harvard Professor of Paleontology:

The fossil record with its abrupt transitions offers no support for gradual change… (qtd in the comment section to the WND article “Voters pick Creation Museum as top destination” by Bob Unruh, May 24, 2012)

“The extreme rarity of transitional forms in the fossil record persists as the trade secret of paleontology.” (qtd in the comment section to the WND article “Voters pick Creation Museum as top destination” by Bob Unruh, May 24, 2012)

“The absence of fossil evidence for intermediary stages between major transitions in organic design, indeed our inability, even in our imagination, to construct functional intermediates in many cases, has been a persistent and nagging problem for gradualistic accounts of evolution.” (source)

Dr. Marc Kirschner, chair of the Department of Systems Biology, Harvard Medical School, stated in “15 Questions for Evolutionists” by Don Batten, Creation Ministries International, http://creation.com/15-questions:

In fact, over the last 100 years, almost all of biology has proceeded independent of evolution, except evolutionary biology itself. Molecular biology, biochemistry, physiology, have not taken evolution into account at all.

Dr. Colin Patterson, former senior paleontologist of the British Museum of Natural History and author of “Evolution”:

“I fully agree with your comments about the lack of direct illustration of evolutionary transitions in my book. If I knew of any, fossil or living, I would certainly have included them …. I will lay it on the line – there is not one such fossil for which one could make a watertight argument.” (source)

Calvin Smith:

To the surprise of many, ducks,1squirrels,2platypus,3 beaver-like4 and badger-like5 creatures have all been found in ‘dinosaur-era’ rock layers along with bees, cockroaches, frogs and pine trees. Most people don’t picture a T. rex walking along with a duck flying overhead, but that’s what the so-called ‘dino-era’ fossils would prove!

Evolutionist Stephen M. Stanley of Johns Hopkins University:

“In fact, the fossil record does not convincingly document a single transition from one species to another.” (source)

Time Magazine:

“Yet despite more than a century of digging, the fossil record remains maddeningly sparse. With so few clues, even a single bone that doesn’t fit into the picture can upset everything. Virtually every major discovery has put deep cracks in the conventional wisdom and forced scientists to concoct new theories, amid furious debate.” (source)

Evolutionist Dr. Lyall Watson:

“The fossils that decorate our family tree are so scarce that there are still more scientists than specimens. The remarkable fact is that all of the physical evidence we have for human evolution can still be placed, with room to spare, inside a single coffin!” (source)

Logical/Theoretical Implications of Darwinism:

If Darwinism is true, he said, then there are five inescapable conclusions:

  1. There’s no evidence for God
  2. There’s no life after death
  3. There’s no absolute foundation for right and wrong
  4. There’s no ultimate meaning for life
  5. People don’t really have free will

~evolutionary biologist and historian William Provine of Cornell University, qtd. in Lee Strobel’s The Case for a Creator (Zondervan, 2004), Chapter 1

Plate Tectonics:

John Baumgardner, geophysicist, in “Probing the earth’s deep places: Interview with plate tectonics expert Dr John Baumgardner” by Carl Wieland and Dr Don Batten, available at http://creation.com/probing-the-earths-deep-places:

The strong weight of evidence is that there was a massive catastrophe, corresponding to the Genesis Flood, which involved large and rapid continental movements. My conclusion is that the only mechanism capable of producing that scale of catastrophe and not wrecking the planet in the process had to be internal to the earth.

Radiocarbon Dating:

CMI on radiocarbon dating:

It’s long been known that radiocarbon (which should disappear in only a few tens of thousands of years at the most) keeps popping up reliably in samples (like coal, oil, gas, etc.) which are supposed to be ‘millions of years’ old. For instance, CMI has over the years commissioned and funded the radiocarbon testing of a number of wood samples from ‘old’ sites (e.g. with Jurassic fossils, inside Triassic sandstone, burnt by Tertiary basalt) and these were published (by then staff geologist Dr Andrew Snelling) in Creation magazine and Journal of Creation. In each case, with contamination eliminated, the result has been in the thousands of years, i.e. C-14 was present when it ‘shouldn’t have been’. These results encouraged the rest of the RATE team to investigate C-14 further, building on the literature reviews of creationist M.D. Dr Paul Giem.

In another very important paper presented at this year’s ICC, scientists from the RATE group summarized the pertinent facts and presented further experimental data. The bottom line is that virtually all biological specimens, no matter how ‘old’ they are supposed to be, show measurable C-14 levels. This effectively limits the age of all buried biota to less than (at most) 250,000 years.

Science as a Religious or Philosophical Commitment:

Loren Eiseley, Ph.d. (anthropology):

With the failure of these many efforts science was left in the somewhat embarrassing position of having to postulate theories of living origins which it could not demonstrate. after having chided the theologian for his reliance on myth and miracle, science found itself in the unenviable position of having to create a mythology of its own: namely, the assumption that what, after long effort, could not be proved today, had in truth, taken place in the primeval past.” (‘The Secret Of Life’ In The Immense Jouney, Random House, Ny, 1957, p.199). Source

Julian Huxley (grandson of Thomas Huxley, qtd in the comment section to the WND article “Voters pick Creation Museum as top destination” by Bob Unruh, May 24, 2012:

I suppose the reason we leaped at the origin of species was because the idea of God interfered with our sexual mores.

Richard Lewontin of Harvard:

We take the side of science in spite of the patent absurdity of some of its constructs, . . . in spite of the tolerance of the scientific community for unsubstantiated commitment to materialism. . . . we are forced by our a priori adherence to material causes to create an apparatus of investigation and set of concepts that produce material explanations, no matter how counterintuitive, no matter how mystifying to the uninitiated. Moreover, that materialism is absolute, for we cannot allow a Divine Foot in the door. (source)

H.S. Lipson, Frs (Professor of Physics, University of Manchester, Uk):

“In fact, evolution became in a sense a scientific religion; almost all scientists have accepted it and many are prepared to ‘bend’ their observations to fit with it.” (‘A Physicist Looks At Evolution’ Physics Bulletin, vol 31, 1980, p.138). Source

Dr. L. Harrison Matthews:

The fact of evolution is the backbone of biology, & biology is thus in the peculiar position of being a science founded on an unproved theory – is it then a science or a faith? Belief in the theory of evolution is thus exactly parallel to belief in a special creation – both are concepts which believers know to be true but neither, up to the present, has been capable of proof.” (L. Harrison Matthews, Frs, Introduction to Darwin’s The Origins of the Species, J.M. Dent & Sons Ltd, London, 1971 p. xi)

Dr. L.T. More, qtd in the comment section to the WND article “Voters pick Creation Museum as top destination” by Bob Unruh, May 24, 2012:

The more one studies paleontology, the more certain one becomes that evolution is based on faith alone; exactly the same sort of faith which is necessary to have when one encounters the great mysteries of religion… The only alternative is the doctrine of special creation, which may be true, but is irrational.

Atheist Michael Ruse from Saving Darwinism from the Darwinians from the May 13, 2000 National Post said the following, as cited from Acts & Facts November 2008, page 13 (found at http://defendingcontending.com/2009/03/20/an-atheist-admits-what-weve-known-all-along/):

Evolution is promoted by its practitioners as more than mere science. Evolution is promulgated as an ideology, a secular religion–a full-fledged alternative to Christianity, with meaning and morality. I am an ardent evolutionist and an ex-Christian, but I must admit that in this one complaint . . .the literalists are absolutely right. Evolution is a religion. This was true of evolution in the beginning, and it is true of evolution still today.

George Wald (Nobel Prize winning biology prof at Harvard), qtd in the comment section to the WND article “Voters pick Creation Museum as top destination” by Bob Unruh, May 24, 2012:

I do not want to believe in God, therefore I choose to believe in that which I know is scientifically impossible, spontaneous generation arising from evolution.

Scientific Censorship:

On January 15, 2012, the British Department of Education is reported by Dominic Statham and Philip Bell in “Dawkins gloats over boost to evolutionary dogma in schools: Another hollow victory for educational censorship,” Creation Ministries International, January 21, 2012 here: http://creation.com/dawkins-bha-schools-creation to have

revised its model funding agreement … [so that] … funding will be withdrawn from any free school that teaches what it claims are ‘evidence-based views or theories’ that run ‘contrary to established scientific and/or historical evidence and explanations’ [i.e. evolutionary dogma].” This, in turn, “has been seized upon by anti-creationists who are pressing for wider concessions from the government” (emphasis added).

Social Darwinism:

Historian Steven Beller in “Ludwig Wittgenstein: Darwin doubter” by Jerry Bergman, Published: 31 May 2011, available at http://creation.com/ludwig-wittgenstein-darwin-doubter wrote that the “success of biology, with its inspiration of social Darwinism,” was integral to

… nationalism and racialism, [and] threatened the liberal, Enlightenment-grounded assumptions behind Jewish integration in Central Europe. When combined in Vienna with the ability of the Governing Mayor, Karl Lueger, and his Christian Social cronies to harness the really not very modern resentment by the ‘little man’ of Jewish success, this ‘biological turn’ in the form of ‘scientific’ anti-Semitism, effectively destroyed the emancipatory assumptions of Jews (and their allies).” (from Edmonds, D. and Eidinow, J., Wittgenstein’s Poker: The Story of a Ten-Minute Argument Between Two Great Philosophers, HarperCollins, New York, NY, pp. 80–81, 2001, ref. 5, p. 103).

Statistical Improbability/Impossibility:

Jonathan Gray, author of “The Forbidden Secret”:

Even the simplest cell you can conceive of would require no less than 100,000 DNA base pairs and a minimum of about 10,000 amino acids, to form the essential protein chain. Not to mention the other things that would also be necessary for the first cell.

Bear in mind that every single base pair in the DNA chain has to have the same molecular orientation (“left-hand” or “right hand”)? As well as that, virtually all the amino acids must have the opposite orientation. And every one must be without error.

“Now,” explained Larry, “to randomly obtain those correct orientations, do you know your chances? It would be 1 chance in 2110,000, or 1 chance in 1033,113!

“To put it another way, if you attempted a trillion, trillion, trillion combinations every second for 15 billion years, the odds you would achieve all the correct orientations would still only be one chance in a trillion, trillion, trillion, trillion … and the trillions would continue 2755 times!

“It would be like winning more than 4700 state lotteries in a row with a single ticket purchased for each. In other words…impossible.”

Transmutation of Species:

Dr. Etheridge, Paleontologist of the British Museum, qtd in the comment section to the WND article “Voters pick Creation Museum as top destination” by Bob Unruh, May 24, 2012:

Nine-tenths of the talk of evolutionists is sheer nonsense, not founded on observation and wholly unsupported by facts. This museum is full of proofs of the utter falsity of their views. In all this great museum, there is not a particle of evidence of the transmutation of species.

Dr. Stephen Jay Gould, famous Harvard Professor of Paleontology:

“Every paleontologist knows that most species don’t change. That’s bothersome….brings terrible distress. ….They may get a little bigger or bumpier but they remain the same species and that’s not due to imperfection and gaps but stasis. And yet this remarkable stasis has generally been ignored as no data. If they don’t change, its not evolution so you don’t talk about it.” (lecture at Hobart & William Smith College)

University of Bristol scientist Alan Linton:

“Throughout 150 years of the science of bacteriology, there is no evidence that one species of bacteria has changed into another. None exists in the literature claiming that one species has been shown to evolve into another.”

Dr. Colin Patterson, former senior paleontologist of the British Museum of Natural History and author of “Evolution”:

“I fully agree with your comments about the lack of direct illustration of evolutionary transitions in my book. If I knew of any, fossil or living, I would certainly have included them …. I will lay it on the line – there is not one such fossil for which one could make a watertight argument.” (source)

Evolutionist Jeffrey Schwartz, professor of anthropology at the University of Pittsburgh:

the formation of a new species, by any mechanism, has never been observed.

Evolutionist Stephen M. Stanley of Johns Hopkins University:

“In fact, the fossil record does not convincingly document a single transition from one species to another.” (source)

Advertisements

One thought on “Creation and Evolution Quotes

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s