08.05.09
Archive: Who remembers Wistar?
archive: April 3, 2007
Questioning Evolution.
The Darwin debate has been the victim of a heist on the part of the ID movement. The original critics of Darwin (although fundamentalists, of course, go back a long way) were mostly good biologists. Here’s a reference to the almost forgotten Wistar Institute conference. It would be nice if they would reprint the text that issued from this colloquium.
Fifty-two of the greatest evolutionists and mathematicians met at Wistar Institute of Anatomy and Biology (in April 1966) to discuss why evolution was violating so many laws of established science and the laws of probability. The conclusion of this meeting was that the probability of evolution according to the established laws of mathematics was impossible.
Murray Egan of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology admitted that an entire new order of natural law would have to be discovered both in chemistry, physics and biology for evolution to have any credibility whatsoever. Even Colin Patterson, senior paleontologist at the British Museum and author of the British Museum magazine “Evolution,†admitted that of all the 100,000 fossils in our museums there is not one intermediate link to prove the evolution theory.
It is time to come out of the closet and tell the people.
It is interesting that it was creationists that laid the groundwork for modern science today: Antiseptic surgery, Joseph Wister; bacteriology, Louis Pasteur; calculus, Isaac Newton; celestial mechanics, Johannes Kepler; chemistry, Robert Boyle; comparative anatomy, George Cuvier; computer science, Charles Babbage. All believed in a creator God that made the possibility of science even possible because there was order and design that could be discovered and built upon.
Dr. Karl Popper, one of the greatest living philosophers of science in the world, has admitted that evolution is not even a scientific hypotheses, because every time something in its theory is disproved, it merely changes its theory.
Dr. Popper states it is not a credible science but rather a metaphysical research program. In other words, a religion.
Ken Depledge Randolph