|
Open Forum: Neo-Darwinism is pure fraud
In response to a previous writer's statement " ... modern neo-Darwinian synthesis of organic evolution is supported by more compelling and intellectually satisfying empirical evidence that any other idea ever advanced by the world's scientific community ... "
The retort to this statement is simple: hogwash! Remember, the neo-Darwinian evolutionary theory is not "change over time" or "modifications through natural selection within an existing species", nor dynamics of cellular metamorphosis. These kinds of actions are simply workings of the natural order and have been observed and recorded for centuries.
So, science is not synonymous with neo-Darwinism. Neo-Darwinism is in reality a very recent construct. In fact, it was and is being continually cobbled together long after Darwin himself died. Neo-Darwinism in effect says - since there is no pre-planned design behind it - every thing is random and undirected-nothing is planned. There is no purposeful form of life. So human beings, like everything else, is in effect just one of the many possible resulting accidents of an unconscious blind cosmic dice shake. Everything that is came into being as an accident and will disappear someday the same way. Consequently, there is no reason for being, nor any purpose for the natural world, or behavioral norms, and surely there is no rational for a future hope in anything.
Neo-Darwinism's top proponents-Dawkins, Huxley, Weiner, Gould and Dobzhansky are all convinced atheists. For the person who is interested in the subject, but does not want to wade through pages of polemic, or get into deep esoteric scientific reading, might simply go to the video store and ask for Ben Stein's "Expelled" or get a hold of the book "Icons of Evolution" by molecular biologist Jonathan Wells. It might stun you on just how neo-Darwinism is pure fraud.
Ron Lindner
East Gull Lake
Some are just plain guilty
A couple of weeks ago a woman in Minneapolis made the decision to drive drunk and passed out in her car, running into a bus shelter and killing an innocent bystander. A week or so later the situation was repeated in Champlin when an intoxicated driver ran a red light and killed a pedestrian. These aren't isolated stories. This scene is repeated every day in this country.
The legislators and the courts have tried to stop this mayhem, but they are met each step of the way by defense attorneys who try to pick apart their attempts in an effort at getting drunk drivers back on the roads with as little punishment as possible. Right now such an attempt is going on with the intoxilzers that police have used for a long time and this effort has gone on for three years.
Everybody deserves their day in court, but once in a while you are just plain guilty and deserve to be punished, and used as an example to those who will still think about drinking and driving. No amount of money should get you off, just like no amount of money will bring back those who have been killed.
Mike Holst
Crosslake
All I have to say is 'wow'
In regard to Tim Pawlenty not running for governor in 2010, it brings back an old saying! "When you can't take the heat, it's time to get out of the kitchen!"
Along with him leaving, the Republican Party, in mentioning replacements, should wake up to the fact that, "two wrongs won't make a right," when it was said that Norm Coleman and/or Michelle Bachmann may run for governor!
Wow!
James Cummings
Nisswa
To Subscribe to the Brainerd Dispatch, Click Here.
Note: Comments are not edited and don't represent the views of The Brainerd Dispatch. Please read our posting rules in the terms of service policy. To report a post that may be inappropriate, click the triangle alert icon.
|
|
Top Commented Articles
