There were fewer than a dozen of them in all, all brilliant scientists seriously doubting the conventional wisdom that Darwinism had been proven fact. They are both U.S. and foreign citizens, and they are all highly endorsed, dissatisfied with the accepted belief that Darwin’s theory of evolution fully explains the origin of life and is an established scientific fact. However, this is what they were all taught – and what they know is still being taught – even in advanced biology classes. Michael Behe, a world-renowned biologist from Lehigh University, has expressed his frustration (anger) that he completed a PhD program without ever having access to Michael Denton’s A strong argument against traditional Darwinian theory presented in Darwin in a Darwinian Crisis. “. Dean Kenyon, Ph.D., Professor Emeritus of Evolutionary Biology at San Francisco State University and Drs. Paul Nelson, Stephen Meyer, William Demsky, Jonathon Wells, Jed McCosko and Scott Minich – biologists, chemists, philosophers.
They discuss the impact of modern laboratory equipment, such as electron micrographs at 50,000x magnification of living cells – a technique that has only recently emerged, and advances in many related fields that pose substantial challenges to a century and a half – old Darwin Doctrine – The mass media, the courts, the universities and the public ignore it. Through their research and personal experiments, these scientists have all come to question Darwinism’s traditional belief system and most certainly disagree that it is proven science. In an atmosphere of infinite freedom of expression, they then exchange ideas and concepts, theoretically exploring the mysteries of life – including all rational scientific choices.
Later, many described the gathering as a defining moment in their tech lives.
They started with Charles Darwin, who spent a month on the isolated Galapagos Islands on a five-year expedition voyage in 1831, discovering unique animals, plants and birds unlike anywhere else kind. In the latter, he discovered 13 species of finches, with beaks of varying shapes and sizes, which became central to his theory 25 years later in his revolutionary book On the Origin of Species. His theme is that temporal and random chance mutations occasionally provide a natural advantage for obtaining seed food in different regions of different plant life – which over time leads to an optimized food source for various beak shapes relative to a particular region. This is an important conclusion to draw from his observations – that small changes in beak shape over generations, triggered by random chance mutations, but providing a beneficial advantage in the competition for survival through functional improvements will gradually lead to specific beak shape-optimized foods source. No need for supreme “intelligent” guidance— Darwin then extrapolated his thesis from optimization of beak shape in finches to major changes in all basic life forms in animals, dramatic physical changes in appearance and function, thereby improving the chances of success in the race for survival. Darwin’s term: “Natural selection for the survival of the fittest”.
When scholars and scientists review Darwin’s words, “..not in sudden leaps, but in short, sure, slow steps,” they note what he also said (and what his supporters never seem to admit) , “However, if it can be shown that the existence of any complex organism Impossible to form through multiple successive slight modifications, my theory would absolutely collapse. “ (Emphasis added.)
bacterial flagellar motors,
Of great interest is a well-known object in the scientific community today, a thimble filled with a cultured organic liquid containing billions of single-celled bacteria, each packed with complex circuits and microscopic molecular “machines.” A detailed analysis of the common bacterium propelled by its rapidly spinning flagella. “It’s like an outboard,” commented Dr. Behe. Harvard’s Dr. H. Berg called it “the most efficient motor in the universe.” Dr. Scott Minich has studied this phenomenon for 20 years and describes it: “.. spinning at 100,000 rpm, stopping a quarter turn and then spinning in the opposite direction, while continuously receiving and processing incoming and outgoing signals from the environment. to avoid obstacles.” He explained that a detailed examination of the microscopic mechanisms revealed components and functions similar to the optimized mechanical complexity of a standard outboard engine-propeller system.
As a method of their scientific assessment of whiplash tail, the concept of “irreducible complexity” is discussed. Take a normal mousetrap, for example, this is clear to all – five components: a bait rack; a catch (or kill) mechanism; a stop; a trigger; and a platform, all in proper The relationship is fixed above. Of significance to scientists are three specific Darwinian factors that should apply to living things:
- The system will not operate until all elements of the system are present and functioning properly;
- until the system works properly, Non-functional elements are not a benefit but a hindrance to the viability of the entity; and
- According to Darwin’s own theory of natural selection, this unhelpful appendage would be eliminated in future generations.
The complex functional wonder shown in the microscope is broken down into the similar and numerous elements of a common motor propulsion system – forty parts, equivalent to rotor parts, drive shafts, stators, brakes, flexible joints, etc. (plus an additional feedback sensor ). Each part of this mechanical system uses modern competing technologies and has been specifically designed and engineered for maximum overall operational efficiency – in stark contrast to Darwin’s theory of random chance catastrophe. The visual evidence of the whiptail is clearly completely inconsistent with Darwin’s theory. In their rational view, theories of small changes that occur by chance, somehow combined by chance to achieve the wonders of operational complexity and efficiency are completely unacceptable by any scientific standard. This isn’t just a challenge to Darwin’s theory of evolution – it’s a smash of it!
Inferences for the best explanation,
They are scientists, seeking to understand. While Darwin’s theory is excellent and clearly applicable at the subclass level (for beak shape – or skin coloration in bears or humans – to optimize the absorption of vitamin D in different regions of sunlight exposure, whether harmful or beneficial), For the fundamental and initial origins of living organisms, however, an analogy with an outboard engine is unavoidable. By logic, the end result can only be achieved with the ultimate goal of “intelligence”, driving specific detailed “design-engineering” elements.
The methodology of science is specific in accepting “inferences to the best explanation”. Due to the apparent inadequacy of Darwin’s theory and the lack of other viable theories, the alternative concept – first introduced by Behe in his book “Darwin’s Black Box” – was firmly chosen by scientists as the best possible view of the origin of life forms Explained – “Intelligent Design”!