DarwinianAtheists

I got this from john davidsons blog, he makes some enjoyable posts

"why Are Darwnians Atheists? – I offered a primary reason for the refusal of the Darwinian to accept a purposeful, guided evolution. That reason is Pride, one of the seven deadly sins. Acceptance of a guided evolution conflicts with his atheist mindset in a very fundamental fashion, a conflict which has led to the intractable polarization that has always plagued our search for the truth concerning the mechanism explaining our origins. The atheist Darwinian doesn’t believe in sin anyway so he is immune to its implications. There is a more significant reason Darwinians do not test the Darwinian model. It is – fear , fear of what the results may mean for their precious notion of Natural Selection. The Darwinian sees evolution in action everywhere he looks, but rarely, if ever, applies the experimental test that will either verify or negate his presumptions. The Galapagos finches, known as Darwin’s finches, are the perfect demonstration of this failure to apply experimental science to a critical evolutionary question. They have been assumed to represent as many as 12 separate species in the Genus Geospiza, a Genus that also occurs in nearby Ecuador.
The canary is a finch and has been domesticated and bred in captivity for centuries, yet as far as I know no one has attempted to domesticate Darwin’s finches. Fortunately, largely due to the field observations by the husband and wife team of Peter and Rosemary Grant, we now know that spontaneous crosses occur in nature between finches long assumed to be separate species to produce genetically fit offspring. Curiously, the Grants have recently been awarded a one million dollar prize for their work which, as far as it goes, indicates that Darwin’s finches are mere varieties of a common species, quite possibly the progeny of a single fertile female which may have arrived long ago on the Galapagos archipelago from nearby Ecuador. Why this matter has not been further resolved experimentally constitutes a transparent demonstration of the insecurity of the Darwinian community. It is reminiscent of the attempts by Theodosius Dobzhansky to transform the fruitfly Drosophila melanogaster into a new species through experimental selection. He failed, admitted he failed, yet nevertheless remained a Darwinian selectionist for the rest of his life. The proper conclusion to be drawn from Dobzhansky’s experiment is that selection cannot transform one species even to another species in the same Genus. Incidentally that is my conclusion and I still await the experimental transformation of any true species into a new species through the agency of selection, natural or artificial. I do not believe that transformation to be possible, and it certainly cannot possibly be the agency producing the higher taxonomic categories of Genus, Family, Order etc.

Albert Einstein offered a possible explanation for the failure of the Darwinians to effectively question their collective beliefs.

“Few people are capable if expressing with equanimity opinions which differ from the prejudices of their social environment. Most people are even incapable of forming such opinions.”

Albert Einstein, Ideas and Opinions, page 28.
The social environment was generated with the discovery in 1900 of Gregor Mendel’s 1868 paper which laid the foundation for the science of Genetics and mutation of the genes suggested that they were the units which were being selected for or against. The geneticists became convinced that they had found the key to evolution. There is nothing in our present state of knowledge to support that contention. Quite the contrary, natural selection is limited strictly to the elimination of allelic mutants and the preservation of the original species for as long as possible in its original state with only minor, intraspecific changes subject to selective survival, changes which do not lead to new species formation. That was the contention of Richard B. Goldschmidt in 1940, one with which I agree today, 70 years later. We must discard the flawed interpretation of the role for natural selection and recognize that allelic mutation has played no role whatsoever in progressive evolution although it may play a significant role in extinction.
I believe that extinction was also planned just as was evolutionary progress. Without extinction there could never have been evolution. Both were planned long ago.

The picture that emerges from this brief exposition leaves little room for interpretation. By refusing to test the Darwinian model and even to recognize the results when such tests were actually performed, those who continue to support Darwin’s Victorian fantasy leave little doubt as to the answer to our question. There is only one answer – NO! Hamstrung by an atheist ideology, the Darwinian is impotent as a scientist. He is paralyzed by a congenital defect for which a cure is presently unavailable, doomed to be forgotten as nothing but a detractor and impediment to the search for the mechanism which can explain our origins."

“POWER, THE ULTIMATE APHRODISIAC.” John A Davidson

It takes one to know one!

Enjoy your fleeting moments in the sun you pseudo-scientific charlatans with your armies of drooling, illiterate buffoons. You will soon join the ranks of all who have choosen to abandon science to carve a special place for themselves. The full support of Wikipedia, Google and a radical, atheist inspired “Intellectual Community” will not shield you from the Truth.

There is no place for those who must muzzle their adversaries and those who engage in such hideous tactics are fulfilling Thomas Henry Huxley’s warning -

“Science commits suicide when she adopts a creed.”

Heedless of Einstein’s summary -

“A doctrine which is unable to maintain itself in clear light, but only in the dark, will of necessity lose its effect on mankind with uncalculable harm to human progress,”

you all three go right on, trapped in your shared congenital ideology that we live in a purposeless world, mere accidents, the products of forces you already know to be true. If you had not all three deliberately made us your mortal enemies, we would feel sorry for you. Sadly, you have made that impossible and must now reap the crop that you have sown with the seeds of bigotry, intolerance and hate that have marked you as the enemies of Truth and Knowledge, goals that you can impede but cannot stop. I look forward to seeing you all pilloried by your peers, your certain fate as the enemies of science you have all three proven yourselves to be.

Enjoy yourselves, you pathetic enemies of the world you seek to destroy. It is very much later than you think.

It doesn’t get any better than this.

I love it so! John A Davidson