DNA model

–Continued from Page One – Darwin’s Theory of Evolution: Geneticists, Other Scientists, Join Ranks of Darwin Dissenters
–Continued from BNN

Some in the anthropological field of science are not willing to accept the current DNA findings as proof that modern humans did not “evolve” from Neanderthals. Another article, A Breed Apart, DNA Tests: Humans Not Descended from Neanderthals, addressed this issue:

“Loring Brace, an anthropologist at University of Michigan and a proponent of the idea that people descended from Neanderthals — he argues that features of skulls show a steady progression from Neanderthal to human — says the DNA evidence does not sway him. Different patterns of movement may have caused mitochrondial DNA to diverge more quickly in the past, he says. “The whole picture is still very spotty,” Brace says.

Erik Trinkaus, an anthropologist at Washington University in St. Louis, says the DNA evidence does not disprove his assertion that the 25,000-year-old skeleton of child unearthed in Portugal is the descendent of a human-Neanderthal hybrid. The new research, he says, just shows interbreeding was not common.

“There is no contradiction,” he says.”

Other recent DNA discoveries have highlighted the fact that researchers have yet to completely unlock the “secrets” of DNA, but what they did discover relates to Darwin’s theory of evolution or “mutation” through natural selection:

“Most genes change throughout evolution via mutations; useless ones eventually get weeded out of the population while the helpful modifications take hold. However, about 500 regions of our DNA — the body’s instruction code made up of base pairs of molecules — have apparently remained intact throughout the history of mammalian evolution, or the past 80 million to 100 million years, basically free of mutations.”
–LiveScience.com

The “body’s instruction code” refers to genetic instructions for all living organisms:

“Our bodies are made up of some five trillion cells with a multitude of functions. Within the nucleus of almost every one of these cells are long molecules called DNA (deoxyribonucleic acid). DNA is like an organic blueprint or book of recipes. Your DNA is a genetic code that contains all the instructions needed to make an organism like you, to renew your cells and to keep your body functioning properly.”
–Decodeme.com

Mutation is the key word as Darwin’s theory, that of “Natural Selection”, is based upon “descending from a common ancestor” through “beneficial mutations”, which through time, “accumulate into a separate organism”:

“Darwin’s Theory of Evolution – The Premise
Darwin’s Theory of Evolution is the widely held notion that all life is related and has descended from a common ancestor: the birds and the bananas, the fishes and the flowers — all related. Darwin’s general theory presumes the development of life from non-life and stresses a purely naturalistic (undirected) “descent with modification”. That is, complex creatures evolve from more simplistic ancestors naturally over time. In a nutshell, as random genetic mutations occur within an organism’s genetic code, the beneficial mutations are preserved because they aid survival — a process known as “natural selection.” These beneficial mutations are passed on to the next generation. Over time, beneficial mutations accumulate and the result is an entirely different organism (not just a variation of the original, but an entirely different creature.”
–Blackwell Publishing

Now we find that one theory of evolution, anthropologists who believe modern humans evolved from Neanderthals, may be about to “hit the scientific dust” due to DNA.

The current DNA finding has modern man as a “cousin” of Neanderthals, but apparently not a “kissing” cousin as there seems to be lack of “interbreeding” DNA. We also find that over 700 scientists have added their name to a growing list of scientists, including biochemists and geneticists, who have “dissented” from Darwinism and natural selection while the mainstreet media continues to report only “one side” of this very serious debate about man’s origins.

From the “Other” Side of Science

“The theory of evolution of man is supported by a set of independent observations within the fields of anthropology, paleontology, and molecular biology. Collectively, they depict life branching out from a common ancestor through gradual genetic changes over millions of years, commonly known as the “tree of life.” Although accepted in mainstream science as altogether factual and experimentally proven, a closer examination of the evidences reveal some inaccuracies and reasonable alternative explanations. This causes a growing number of scientists to dissent from the Darwinian theory of evolution for its inability to satisfactorily explain the origin of man.

…..

“The theory concerning the evolution of man is under increased scrutiny due to the persistence of gaps in the fossil record, the inability to demonstrate “life-or-death” determining advantageous genetic mutations, and the lack of experiments or observations to truly confirm the evidence for speciation. Overall, the evolution of man pervades as the accepted paradigm on the origin of man within the scientific community. This is not because it has been proven scientifically, but because alternative viewpoints bring with them metaphysical implications which go against the modern naturalistic paradigm. Nevertheless, a closer examination of the evidence reveals evolution to be increasingly less scientific and more reliant upon beliefs, not proof.”

It is those “beliefs” which the mainstream media continues to report to the public as fact while disregarding compelling research and scientific findings to the contrary. Which begs these questions: how many Darwin dissenting scientists would it take for the MSM to report that Darwin’s theory is a theory and not fact? And, “why does the MSM hold such a vested interest in continuing the charade that the theory of evolution is “fact” while withholding the information that a large number of scientists are joining together in dissent?

The proponents for evolution are scientists, educators in the public sector, and the main stream media. The opponents: scientific Darwin dissenters and religious groups such as Christians who believe that man originated from “Intelligent Design” or “Creationism”:

Intelligent design refers to a scientific research program as well as a community of scientists, philosophers and other scholars who seek evidence of design in nature. The theory of intelligent design holds that certain features of the universe and of living things are best explained by an intelligent cause, not an undirected process such as natural selection. Through the study and analysis of a system’s components, a design theorist is able to determine whether various natural structures are the product of chance, natural law, intelligent design, or some combination thereof. Such research is conducted by observing the types of information produced when intelligent agents act. Scientists then seek to find objects which have those same types of informational properties which we commonly know come from intelligence. Intelligent design has applied these scientific methods to detect design in irreducibly complex biological structures, the complex and specified information content in DNA, the life-sustaining physical architecture of the universe, and the geologically rapid origin of biological diversity in the fossil record during the Cambrian explosion approximately 530 million years ago.
–Intelligent Design

At a broad level, a Creationist is someone who believes in a god who is absolute creator of heaven and earth, out of nothing, by an act of free will. Such a deity is generally thought to be constantly involved (‘immanent’) in the creation, ready to intervene as necessary, and without whose constant concern the creation would cease or disappear. Christians, Jews, and Muslims are all Creationists in this sense. Generally they are known as ‘theists,’ distinguishing them from ‘deists,’ that is people who believe that there is a designer who might or might not have created the material on which he (or she or it) is working and who does not interfere once the designing act is finishing. The focus of this discussion is on a narrower sense of Creationism, the sense that one usually finds in popular writings (especially in America today). Here, Creationism means the taking of the Bible, particularly the early chapters of Genesis, as literally true guides to the history of the universe and to the history of life, including us humans, down here on earth (Numbers 1992).
–Plato.Stanford.edu

The MSM is notoriously biased against religion. The chances of finding an MSM article that supported the Christian viewpoint on Intelligent Design are less than finding the DNA of a Neanderthal in modern man.

The MSM has invested in reams of news print “reporting” on science where the MSM assumes the theory of evolution is a settled fact. The article I cited in the New York Times is an example were they cited that man evolved from chimps as “fact” when, the last time I checked, it’s still a theory. These types of articles act as a PR service for evolutionists. Yet it seems odd that journalists, who, by their very nature, are supposed to be “inquisitive”, would turn their collective heads away from the mounting evidence that Darwinism is being questioned by the very scientists who are experts in the field of human origins.

There seems to be some sort of “fear” factor involved, otherwise, why not report on every scientific angle of human origin, of scientific studies and research that debunk the theory of evolution? Which calls into question of why would people would fear the demise of Darwinism?

Contrary to some, the demise of Darwinism wouldn’t mean the replacement of Darwinism with such theories as Intelligent Design or creationism, but a more thorough scientific understanding of the origin of man, one that was based on fact and not on theory or beliefs.

Scientists, researchers, and educators have vested quite a bit in the Darwin theory. In fact, some have taken Darwin’s theory as the “gospel truth”, attacking those who question it with a veracity not seen since the Salem witch hunts. Scientists and the media have also spent decades trying to prove Darwin was correct, a vast amount of time and reputations on the line, trying to pound a square peg into a round hole, while disavowing other scientist’s findings which are contradictory. What we’re seeing now, and what isn’t being reported, is that many scientists and researchers have “evolved” beyond the Darwin theory while the media continues to pound out on caveman drums and send smoke signals in support of the Darwinists.

With the advent of advanced DNA testing, the scientific world has already made astounding finds which relate to man’s origins. What would be even more astounding would be for the media to take off their blinders and actually report the type of findings which contradict Darwin’s theory as well as report that Darwin’s theory… is still a theory, and not fact.

If the scientific world were to come to the conclusion that Darwin’s theory no longer applied, how would the dominoes would fall? It’s easy to surmise that the media and educators would immediately suffer from long term memory lapse and herald the dawn of a new scientific age, while some scientists would cling to the last vestiges of the theory of evolution and, perhaps, enter into psychological counseling.

Unless God were to descend from Heaven, smote a few souls, then appear on Larry King Live with a few of his angels and lay out his own “Intelligent Design”, those who believe man was created by God are out of luck–until scientists are able to “prove” God’s “theory” by man’s scientific methods.

By LGB

Image – DNA Model
Image – Sistine Chapel
Image – Square Peg II
Image – Neanderthal Man

Back to Page One – Darwin’s Theory of Evolution: Geneticists, Other Scientists, Join Ranks of Darwin Dissenters