ucmpage.gif (9365 bytes)



by Tom Graffagnino

The editors of my local paper (Columbus, Ga.) sometimes like to "tweak" the creationists in their audience. Last week they ran an "in memoriam" article about the death of Stephen Jay Gould (Harvard evolutionist) written by Michael Ruse. Then in their "Quotable" box at the top of the editorial page, they published a quote by Ashley Montague who apparently doesn't appreciate the creationist's position on how things got started (and have "ended up").....

As has been my custom, I just had to respond.......

Thanks for the "Qoutable" today.....

"Science has proof without certainty. Creationists have certainty without proof." --Ashley Montague

If Mr. Montague is talking about the proof for MICRO-evolution, (ie., that natural changes occur WITHIN species like finch beak length, etc...), then everyone can agree. Everyone.....including the dreaded six, 24 hour day, fundamental creationists. There is, indeed, ample scientific proof that such a thing (ie., micro-evolution) occurs. Micro-evolution can be observed. It can be tested. It can be replicated in the lab......It can be proved.

But when it comes to proof....scientific proof or otherwise....that all of life's rich assortment of species grew from a common ancestor through the Darwinian processes of natural selection and "survival of the fittest" mechanisms (an undirected "natural" process governed only by Father Chance plus Time).....Well, guess what? There simply is no proof.

Recently deceased Harvard biology prof, Stephen Jay Gould ( no friend of creationism in ANY form, BTW), knew that the alleged "proof" wasn't there, and much to the chagrin of his ivory-towered colleagues, he wasn't afraid to say so in public.

He wrote:

"Paleontologists have paid an exorbitant price for Darwin's argument. We fancy ourselves as the only true students of life's history, yet to preserve our favored account of evolution by natural selection we view our data as so bad that we never see the process we profess to study."

And when he went on record not long ago with this bit of candid information....

"The extreme rarity of transitional forms in the fossil record persists as the trade secret of paleontology. The evolutionary trees that adorn our textbooks have data only at the tips and nodes of their branches; the rest is inference, however reasonable, not the evidence of fossils." ......you could hear the audible gasps coming from the hallowed biology/paleontology labs across the land. (There are certain "trade secrets", after all, that simply should not be repeated in public!)

And when Gould stated that neo-Darwinism "...as a general proposition, is effectively dead, despite its persistence as textbook orthodoxy," you could hear his colleagues, The Darwinian Council of Oz, saying to the general public: "Don't pay any attention to that man behind the curtain!"

Well, don't look now, fellas, but the "secret's" out. The dirty laundry is slowly being hung out there on the line for all to see. Defensive damage control is the bio/paleontological current battle plan and order of the day. And their battle cry?

"No Debate Allowed!"

The Oz-onians are hurriedly soldering the iron bars across the classroom doors now. Their signs...."Alternative Theories Verboten!"......are being hung prominently above the padlocked classroom entrances.

The long and the short of it is that you won't find statements like these of Mr. Gould (above) in any public school textbooks...despite their undeniable accuracy.

And you won't find them in any public school textbooks for EXACTLY the same reason that you won't find them Tuesday morning in the "Quotable" box of the Ledger-Enquirer editorial page. Montague's observations conform to acceptable orthodoxy. Stephen Jay Gould's observations, however, must be censored and kept out of the public eye......(For fear of.......?)

Bertand Russell once said that, "There is something feeble and a little contemptible about a man who cannot face the perils of life without the help of comfortable myths." When Mr. Gould exposed modernism's "comfortable creation myth" of Darwinian Macro-Evolution, most of his colleagues (the "Oz-onians") immediately began circling the wagons and (feebly) drawing that curtain tight.........

"While [the Darwin lobby] may succeed in suppressing a real debate in isolated instances, the issue isn't going away. The greatest irony is that Darwinists often invoke the Scopes trial even while trying to prevent any evidence against Darwinism from being heard in the classroom. They've turned the lesson of Scopes entirely on its head." --Bruce Chapman



<Back to News