Alan explains how Darwinism is controlled by a presupposition that makes it closed-minded and anti-science.
Darwinists around the world celebrated the 200th anniversary of Charles Darwin’s birth on February 12, 2010. Darwin parties will continue all year since November 22nd will also mark the 150th anniversary of Darwin’s landmark book, On the Origin of Species. It’s a momentous year for all things Darwin.
But this celebration is more about the Darwinists of today than the Darwin of yesterday. Conspicuously absent from this year’s celebration is a tribute to one of Darwin’s most noteworthy traits: intellectual honesty.
When you read Darwin’s book, it’s refreshing to see his honesty about the many difficulties with evolution. Like any good scientist, he acknowledges his theory could be proven false (it’s falsifiable). He even offers several predictions and includes specific examples of the kind of data that is necessary to show he’s mistaken. He was a fair-minded man.
Not so with Darwinists today. According to them, evolution is not only a proven fact, but impossible to disprove. It’s scientific dogma. Sure, they give a nod to falsifiability by saying evolution is “testable,” “open to evidence,” and is “forever uncertain,” but this is just lip-service. Their lips would serve the scientific community far better if they uttered the words “open to error” and actually meant it.
If Darwinists were open to evidence against evolution, they would consider the evidence of design and intelligence in biology. Though these might qualify as evidence to reasonable scientists, they are the very things Darwinists disqualify by definition!
Noted Darwinist Douglas Futuyma says, “In a scientific sense, there can be no evidence for…creation.” Notice he doesn’t say, “There is no evidence,” or “We haven’t found any evidence yet.” He says there can’t be. That’s because he’s not open to any evidence that erodes evolution’s triumph. So much for continuing Darwin’s legacy of being fair-minded. Futuyma has left the school of science and entered the department of dogma.
Why have Darwinists abandoned the falsifiability of evolution? It’s because, in their mind, any evidence against evolution is evidence for an intelligent Designer. And that would go against their treasured sensibilities. Darwinists aren’t interested in the right answers, but the right kind of answers.
It’s too bad for Darwin. His legacy couldn’t continue the treasured scientific tradition of fair-mindedness and falsifiability. Instead, his birthday celebrations will reflect the mentality of Darwinists rather than Darwin, a man of more noble character than his theory’s progeny.
Of course, along with the celebrations will come the usual back-handed swipes at intelligent Christians across the globe. Darwinists will declare that Christians are closed-minded, backward-thinking, and anti-science. That’s usually my cue. So, I’ll stand up and demonstrate with reason and grace that God created all of life and, ironically, point out that it’s the Darwinists who are closed-minded and anti-science.