Sunday, April 7, 2013

The Darwinism skeptic, whom evolutionists fear, says that Neo-Darwinism will be abandoned in 15 years.


1. Will the most dominant form of evolutionary belief, neo-darwinism,  developed in the period of 1937 to 1950 be abandoned?

2. Is there anything credible within evolutionary thought to replace neo-darwinism? Will it be replace with any credible evolutionary thinking in the future?

Neo-Darwinism has been the dominant school of evolutionism for some time and as noted above it was a school of evolutionary thought first developed between 1937 to 1950.  An online dictionary defines Neo-Darwinism as "Darwinism as modified by the findings of modern genetics." 

The Harvard paleontologist and evolutionist Stephen Jay Gould tried to dislodge  neo-darwinism with a radical new form of evolutionism called  punctuated equilibrium  but he wound up watering down his brand of evolutionism because he could not support it via the biological sciences. Gould initially developed his school of evolutionary thought because neo-Darwinism does not fit at all with the fossil record. According to the American Museum of Natural History punctuated equalibrium "asserts that evolution occurs in dramatic spurts interspersed with long periods of stasis".

How satisfied are evolutionary biologists with the current neo-Darwinism model?

 In 2005, Massimo Pigliucci, in a book review for the prestigious science journal Nature, wrote: "The clamour to revise neo-darwinism is becoming so loud that hopefully most practising evolutionary biologists will begin to pay attention. It has been said that science often makes progress not because people change their minds, but because the old ones die off and the new generation is more open to novel ideas." 

In July of 2008, Elizabeth Pennisi wrote in the prestigous American science journal Science: "Seventy years ago, evolutionary biologists hammered out the modern synthesis to bring Darwin's ideas in line with current insights into how organisms change through time. Some say it's time for Modern Synthesis 2.0."

A Darwinism skeptic whom evolutionists fear says neo-darwinism will be abandoned in 15 years

The popular YouTube Christian Shockofgod has a  chatroom moderator who is studying biology at a major university in the world. He goes by the name of VivaYehshua. Our Question evolution! campaign group has challenged the European evolutionist Fergus Mason along with an evolutionist of his choosing to debate Shockofgod and VivaYehshua concerning the 15 questions for evolutionists.

We suggested Mr. Mason pick an evolutionist debate partner from Rationalwiki (Mr. Mason edits at RationalWiki)  despite the fact that an atheist called his fellow athests/agnostics at RationalWiki baboons. See: Fellow atheists says RationalWiki is overrun with baboons
Unfortunately for Mr. Mason  and other RationalWikians,  they were afraid to accept our debate offer.  Yes, they cower before VivaYehshua and Shockofgod like timid little bunnies. They know that VivaYehshua and Shockofgod will make hasenpfeffer out of their lame argumentation and  their foolish beliefs/behavior would be widely public exposed if they were to accept the public debate offer we proposed.

According to VivaYehshua, the Darwinism skeptic whom evolutionists fear (they fear any creationist with an in-depth knowledge of biology),  neo-darwinism will be abandoned in 15 years.  He believes it will be replaced with something even more ridiculous and the evolutionist community will pay lip service to this new school of evolutionism.

Of course, this would be a tremendous opportunity to creationists.  When Stephen Jay Gould came out with his punctuated equilibrium creationists capitalized on the confusion/dissension he created within the evolutionary community. And there is every reason to believe that the abandonment of neo-darwinism with some other evolutionary pseudoscience would be much worse than the initial controversy that followed the introduction of Stephen Gould's punctuated equilibrium.  Why?

The public is to a certain degree fickle when it comes to believing the scientific community consensus. For example, belief in global warming drops during cold snaps public opinion researchers have found.  One thing for certain,  relying on the scientific community consensus over biblical authority has an unreliable track record whereas the Bible can be trusted as it has a wealth of evidential support.  There definitely have been cases where the scientific consensus was wrong and the Bible was proven to be right.  See: Bible versus scientific consensus and  Evidence for Christianity

Question Evolution! Campaign resources and other resources

Question Evolution! Campaign

15 questions for evolutionists

Responses to the 15 Questions: part 1 - Questions 1-3

Responses to the 15 Questions: part 2 - Questions 4–8

Responses to the 15 Questions: part 2 - Questions 9-15 


Other related resources

Atheism, agnosticism and humanism: Godless religions

Refuting evolution

Evidence for Christianity

More evidence for Christianity

Creation Ministries International Question Evolution! Videos

Picture credits:

1. Bull and bear statues

Camera location 50° 6′ 53.71″ N, 8° 40′ 42.64″ E This and other images at their locations on: Google Maps - Google Earth - OpenStreetMap (Info)
Deutsch: Bulle und Bär vor der Frankfurter Börse von Reinhard Dachlauer
English: Bull and bear in front of the Frankfurt Stock Exchange
Source Eva K.
Author Eva K.
Other versions Derivative works of this file:

Picture license: Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 2.5 Generic

No comments:

Post a Comment

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.