Darwiniana

History, Evolution, and The Darwin Debate

Darwiniana header image 2

Wolfe is to be commended for taking on the Darwin establishment. Noone in science or academia is apparently up to it. A horrendous situation

September 1st, 2016 · No Comments

Reading through Wolfe’s take on darwinism the impression is of still another theory of evolution, but the simple fact of someone writing a book critiquing darwinism. Perhaps the paradigm stranglehold is breaking up at last. He won’t arrive at the solution to the problem, but his vigorous take on the whole pretense of darwinism is timely and apt.
But it is important given the evidence of the ‘macro effect’ that no true theory of evolution will be forthcoming any time soon. I have watched people’s reaction to that model: the result is baffled dismay. And that model is just on the surface.
In my take it was Wallace who produced the natural selection theory. The latter was a gedanken experiment that allowed him a breakthrough (let us recall how baffling ‘evolution’ seemed at the beginning) and he came to understand divergence. All the pieces came together arou8nd the something called the ‘mechanism’, and he substituted natural selection for that. But later that ‘theory’ had served its purpose and he quite naturally moved on. The something called the ‘mechanism’ remains obscure.

I would be good to be done with the whole Darwin paradigm and the enforced conformity that is so destructive. Read the selections on this blog of Soren Lovtrup (use the search box). He and many other embryologists saw clearly that Darwin’s theory was puerile, and a fraud.
That theory has put a straightjacket on almost the whole scientific community. Our discussion this morning of WHEE is a reminder that ‘evolution’ isn’t in the category of subjects connected to old-fashioned physics. It has that aspect in part, but it bespeaks a completely new science as yet unknown.
For example, the model in WHEE suggests something is acting from the future. Well, maybe: the model makes no such claim, and doesn’t need it, but the point is that a new physics is needed, and an understanding of teleology, etc…

In any case it is beyond belief that fifty years after Fred Hoyle very clearly exposed the fallacy of darwinism we are still in this morass of darwinian ideology. It smacks of an economic ideology that is enforcing this theory. Well, let us dispose of capitalism, and the theory of Darwin with it. This theory is an excuse for economic competition and leaving people out in the name of the fittest, a wretched bit of bullshit.

Meanwhile to again reference WHEE the hint given is an analogy with high technology, and our inability to understand ‘how it is done’. Not surprising, we are talking about ‘machines’ able to process hypercomplex forms, scan planetary surfaces, select regions, apply change to such regions, act over tens of millennia, proceed with an objective over such time spans, and able to process all the most complicated entities of culture. We fail to understand evolution therefore because our science is way too primitive. We can hardly explain language if we can’t even construct a machine that can speak!
Meanwhile Wolfe is to be commended for taking on the Darwin establishment. Noone in science or academia is apparently up to it. A horrendous situation.

Tags: General

0 responses so far ↓

  • There are no comments yet...Kick things off by filling out the form below.

Leave a Comment