Basic HTML Version
Science
T
HE
new critics of
Charles Darwin's ex–
planation of evolution
are not misguided "cre-
ationists." They are, rather,
among the most respected
adherents of evolution.
"While biology teachers con–
tinue to teach the most up-to-
•
date textbook version ofDarwin's
t
theory of evolution to
the children of the
S
IODS
1980s,"
announc~s ~u-
thor J eremy Rtfkm,
Biologists speak
out where
"creationists" often
f
ail to tread.
20
"sorne of the high priests of bi–
ology have all but abandoned
their own sacred texts.
"Remarkably little has been writ–
ten in the popular press about this
rebellion in the making. The
coup
d'état
has unfolded rather quietly
within the semi-sequestered domain
of official academic conferences and
scholarly journals." So writes Mr.
Rifkin in bis book
Algeny,
page 114,
hardcover edition.
One critic of Darwin's theory of
evolution is Dr. Pierre P. Grassé of
France. Dr. Grassé is considered
one of the world's greatest living
biologists. Said Dr. Grassé: "The
explanatory doctrines of biological
evolution do not stand up to an
objective in-depth criticism....
Through use and abuse of hidden
postulates, of bold, often ill–
founded extrapolations, a pseudo–
science has been created."
David Raup, curator of the Field
Museum of Chicago, says fossil ev–
idence doesn't support gradual,
step-by-step evolution: "We are
now about 120 years after Darwin,
and knowledge of t he fossil
record has been greatly ex–
panded.... Ironical ly, we bave
even fewer examples
of evolu–
tionary transition than we had
in Darwin's time."
David Raup's statements
are actually cautious and too
kind. Says Mr. Rifkin:
"What the 'record' shows is
nearly a century of fudging
and finagling by scientists
attempting to force various
fossil morsels and fragments to
conform with Darwin's notions, all
to no avail" (ibid., page 125).
What, then, is the new theory of
evolution? Biologists are still cast–
ing about for a new explanation.
One thing is certain, however:
The idea that the existence of all
life carne through a mindless evolu–
tionary process has fi nally been
trashed. Now, the evolutionists
have appealed to something called
"Mind." Much of the new concept
is based on the philosophy of Al–
fred North Whitehead.
Says Mr. Rifkin: "In White–
headian tbinking, every living thing
is a small reflection of the total
mind that makes up the uní–
verse.... The goal of evolution is
the enlargement of mind until it
fills the universe and becomes one
with it"
(Aigeny,
page 188).
One may laugh at the notion.
But the point of all this is that
evolutionists are still stuck with the
problem of "Mind." What is this
"Mind" ? There are only two possi–
ble answers: Either one must rec–
ognize that "Mind" is the C reator
God, the maker of all things, and
that through wbat exists we are
forced to see the superiority of his
creative intelligence--or the alter–
native is to worship nature itself,
that which is created, by assigning
to it the notion of "Mind."
The apostle Paul, criticizing the
ancient Greek philosopbers, posed
a challenge even to the new idea of
evolution (which sounds suspi–
ciously as if it had roots in ancient
philosophies): "His invisible al–
tributes, that is to say his everlast–
ing power and deity, have been vis–
ible, ever since the world began, to
the eye of reason,
in the things he
has made.
..."
But most evolutionists reject God
as the Creator. The effect? "Hence
all their thinking has ended in futil–
ity, and their misguided minds are
plunged in darkness.... They have
made fools of themselves, exchang–
ing the splendour of immortal God
for an image
shaped like mortal
man ..."(Roro. 1:20-23, NEB).
The conclusion? The "Mind"
that makes up the totality of the
universe is the Creator God, and
every living thing is a reflection of
his creative mind. (For a thorough
answer to this all-important ques–
tion, write for a free copy of our
booklet
Does God Exist?)
-Paul Kro/1
The
PLAIN TRUTH