{"id":3286,"date":"2009-06-30T21:16:29","date_gmt":"2009-07-01T01:16:29","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.orthodoxytoday.org\/blog\/?p=3286"},"modified":"2009-07-01T13:19:52","modified_gmt":"2009-07-01T17:19:52","slug":"making-a-monkey-out-of-darwin","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.orthodoxytoday.org\/blog\/2009\/06\/making-a-monkey-out-of-darwin\/","title":{"rendered":"Making a Monkey Out of Darwin"},"content":{"rendered":"

CNSNews<\/a> | Patrick J. Buchanan | June 30, 2009<\/p>\n

\u201cYou have no notion of the intrigue that goes on in this blessed world of science,\u201d wrote Thomas Huxley. \u201cScience is, I fear, no purer than any other region of human activity; though it should be.\u201d <\/p>\n

As \u201cDarwin\u2019s bulldog,\u201d Huxley would himself engage in intrigue, deceit and intellectual property theft to make his master\u2019s theory gospel truth in Great Britain. <\/p>\n

He is quoted above for two reasons. <\/p>\n

First is House passage of a \u201ccap-and-trade\u201d climate-change bill. Depending on which scientists you believe, the dire consequences of global warming are inconvenient truths\u2014or a fearmongering scheme to siphon off the wealth of individuals and empower bureaucrats. <\/p>\n

The second is publication of \u201cThe End of Darwinism: And How a Flawed and Disastrous Theory Was Stolen and Sold,\u201d by Eugene G. Windchy, a splendid little book that begins with Huxley\u2019s lament. <\/p>\n

That Darwinism has proven \u201cdisastrous theory\u201d is indisputable. <\/p>\n

\u201cKarl Marx loved Darwinism,\u201d writes Windchy. \u201cTo him, survival of the fittest as the source of progress justified violence in bringing about social and political change, in other words, the revolution.\u201d <\/p>\n

\u201cDarwin suits my purpose,\u201d Marx wrote. Darwin suited Adolf Hitler\u2019s purposes, too. <\/p>\n

\u201cAlthough born to a Catholic family Hitler become a hard-eyed Darwinist who saw life as a constant struggle between the strong and the weak. His Darwinism was so extreme that he thought it would have been better for the world if the Muslims had won the eighth century battle of Tours, which stopped the Arabs\u2019 advance into France. Had the Christians lost, (Hitler) reasoned, Germanic people would have acquired a more warlike creed and, because of their natural superiority, would have become the leaders of an Islamic empire.\u201d <\/p>\n

Charles Darwin also suited the purpose of the eugenicists and Herbert Spencer, who preached a survival-of-the-fittest social Darwinism to robber baron industrialists exploiting 19th-century immigrants.<\/p>\n

Historian Jacques Barzun believes Darwinism brought on World War I: \u201cSince in every European country between 1870 and 1914 there was a war party demanding armaments, an individualist party demanding ruthless competition, an imperialist party demanding a free hand over backward peoples, a socialist party demanding the conquest of power and a racialist party demanding internal purges against aliens\u2014all of them, when appeals to greed and glory failed, invoked Spencer and Darwin, which was to say science incarnate.\u201d <\/p>\n

Yet a theory can produce evil\u2014and still be true. And here Windchy does his best demolition work. <\/p>\n

Darwin, he demonstrates, stole his theory from Alfred Wallace, who had sent him a \u201ccompleted formal paper on evolution by natural selection.\u201d <\/p>\n

\u201cAll my originality … will be smashed,\u201d wailed Darwin when he got Wallace\u2019s manuscript. <\/p>\n

Darwin also lied in \u201cThe Origin of Species\u201d about believing in a Creator. By 1859, he was a confirmed agnostic and so admitted in his posthumous autobiography, which was censored by his family. <\/p>\n

Darwin\u2019s examples of natural selection\u2014such as the giraffe acquiring its long neck to reach ever higher into the trees for the leaves upon which it fed to survive\u2014have been debunked. Giraffes eat grass and bushes. And if, as Darwin claimed, inches meant life or death, how did female giraffes, two or three feet shorter, survive? <\/p>\n

Windchy goes on to relate such scientific hoaxes as \u201cNebraska Man\u201d\u2014an anthropoid ape ancestor to man, whose tooth turned out to belong to a wild pig\u2014and Piltdown Man, the missing link between monkey and man. <\/p>\n

Discovered in England in 1912, Piltdown Man was a sensation until exposed by a 1950s investigator as the skull of a Medieval Englishman attached to the jaw of an Asian ape whose teeth had been filed down to look human and whose bones had been stained to look old. <\/p>\n

Yet three English scientists were knighted for Piltdown Man. <\/p>\n

Other myths are demolished. Bird feathers do not come from the scales of reptiles. There are no gills in human embryos. <\/p>\n

For 150 years, the fossil record has failed to validate Darwin. <\/p>\n

\u201cThe extreme rarity of transitional forms in the fossil record persists as the trade secret of paleontologists,\u201d admitted Stephen J. Gould in 1977. But that fossil record now contains even more species that appear fully developed, with no traceable ancestors. <\/p>\n

Darwin ruled out such \u201cmiracles.\u201d And Darwinists still have not explained the origin of life, nor have they been able to produce life from non-life. <\/p>\n

[…]<\/p>\n

In 1981, Gould had this advice for beleaguered Darwinists: \u201cPerhaps we should all lie low and rally round the flag of strict Darwinism … a kind of old-time religion on our part.\u201d <\/p>\n

Exactly. Darwinism is not science. It is faith. Always was.<\/p>\n

. . . more<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

CNSNews | Patrick J. Buchanan | June 30, 2009 \u201cYou have no notion of the intrigue that goes on in this blessed world of science,\u201d wrote Thomas Huxley. \u201cScience is, I fear, no purer than any other region of human activity; though it should be.\u201d As \u201cDarwin\u2019s bulldog,\u201d Huxley would himself engage in intrigue, deceit … Read more<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":497,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_monsterinsights_skip_tracking":false,"_monsterinsights_sitenote_active":false,"_monsterinsights_sitenote_note":"","_monsterinsights_sitenote_category":0,"generate_page_header":"","footnotes":""},"categories":[11,35,51],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-3286","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-intelligent-design","category-philosophy","category-science"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.orthodoxytoday.org\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/3286","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.orthodoxytoday.org\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.orthodoxytoday.org\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.orthodoxytoday.org\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/497"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.orthodoxytoday.org\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=3286"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.orthodoxytoday.org\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/3286\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.orthodoxytoday.org\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=3286"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.orthodoxytoday.org\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=3286"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.orthodoxytoday.org\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=3286"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}