From the very beginning, when I was a student, I did not believe this Darwin’s theory.
Morning Walk Conversation
with His Divine Grace A. C. Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupada
July 11, 1975, Chicago
httpv://youtu.be/TjxZ6MrBl9E
video: Richard Dawkins: One Fact to Refute Creationism
Evolutionist: Let’s Admit it, We Don’t Fully Understand How Evolution Works | Posted April 27, 2013
But it’s a Fact Anyway | Cornelius Hunter
Philip Ball’s opinion piece in this week’s Nature, the most popular science magazine in the world, is news not because he stated that we don’t fully understand how evolution works at the molecular level, but because he urged his fellow evolutionists to admit it. On this 60th anniversary of the discovery of the DNA double helix, Ball reviews a few of the recent findings that have rebuked the evolution narrative that random mutations created the biological world. Unfortunately Ball fails to take his own advice and ends up doing precisely what he advises other evolutionists against—whitewashing the science.
For instance, evolutionists have had to resort to the explanation that rather than mutations tweaking the DNA’s protein-coding genes to create or improve protein functions, those mutations must have sometimes tweaked regulatory networks that control the expression of said genes. What Ball doesn’t mention is that this new epicycle relies on the prior existence of those regulatory networks and the protein-coding genes they control.
In other words, we now must believe that evolution first constructed the incredible genes and regulatory networks (for which there is no scientific explanation, but that’s another story) which then enabled evolution to proceed.
Such serendipity is unlikely, to put it kindly, but Ball presents it with a straight face:
In a sense this is still natural selection pulling out the best from a bunch of random mutations, but not at the level of the DNA sequence itself.
This is just silly. It is good that Ball admits that we don’t “fully understand” evolution, and it is a positive step for him to urge evolutionists to acknowledge this. But there is a reason why evolutionists avoid the implications of science.
Religion drives science, and it matters.
CHARLES DARWIN ADMITTED…
“If it could be demonstrated that any complex organ existed which could not possibly have been formed by numerous, slight successive modifications, my THEORY would absolutely break down”
Re: The Human Eye..
“To this day the eye makes me shudder”
Pierre Grasse, French evolutionist comments on Darwin’s above statement…
“We fully appreciate Darwin’s fears….We know absolutely nothing about the evolution of the eye of the vertebrate”
But in spite of all logic and reason to the contrary, Wikipedia describes this atheist Darwin’s THEORY as a virtual fact….(he established)
quote
“He established that all species of life have descended over time from common ancestors,[1] and proposed the scientific theory that this branching pattern of evolution resulted from a process that he called natural selection, in which the struggle for existence has a similar effect to the artificial selection involved in selective breeding.[2]
Actually Darwin was just a small time materialistic Kali Yuga mayavadi..life comes from matter!