Quotes from scientist about evolution

larryjf

"I have little hesitation in saying that a sickly pall now hangs over the big bang theory."
(Sir Fred Hoyle, astronomer, cosmologist, and mathematician, Cambridge University)

"The pathetic thing is that we have scientists who are trying to prove evolution, which no scientist can ever prove."
(Dr Robert Millikan, Nobel Prize winner and eminent evolutionist)

"The theory of evolution suffers from grave defects, which are more and more apparent as time advances. It can no longer square with practical scientific knowledge."
(Dr A Fleishmann, Zoologist, Erlangen University)

"It is good to keep in mind ... that nobody has ever succeeded in producing even one new species by the accumulation of micromutations. Darwin's theory of natural selection has never had any proof, yet it has been universally accepted."
(Prof. R Goldschmidt PhD, DSc Prof. Zoology, University of Calif. in Material Basis of Evolution Yale Univ. Press)

"Overwhelming strong proofs of intelligent and benevolent design lie around us ... The atheistic idea is so nonsensical that I cannot put it into words."
(Lord Kelvin, Vict. Inst., 124, p267)

It is possible (and, given the Flood, probable) that materials which give radiocarbon dates of tens of thousands of radiocarbon years could have true ages of many fewer calendar years."
(Gerald Aardsman, Ph.D., physicist and C-14 dating specialist)

"We have to admit that there is nothing in the geological records that runs contrary to the views of conservative creationists."
(Evolutionist Edmund Ambrose)

"The best physical evidence that the earth is young is the dwindling resource that evolutionists refuse to admit is dwindling ... the magnetic energy in the field of the earth's dipole magnet ... To deny that it is a dwindling resource is phoney science."
(Thomas Barnes Ph.D., physicist)

"It is easy enough to make up stories, of how one form gave rise to another, and to find reasons why the stages should be favoured by natural selection. But such stories are not part of science, for there is no way of putting them to the test."
(Luther D Sutherland, Darwin's Enigma, Master Books 1988, p89)

"Is it really credible that random processes could have constructed a reality, the smallest element of which - a functional protein or gene - is complex beyond ... anything produced by the intelligence of man?"
(Molecular biologist Michael Denton, Evolutionist: A Theory in Crisis (London: Burnett Books, 1985) p 342.)

"Although bacteria are tiny, they display biochemical, structural and behavioural complexities that outstrip scientific description. In keeping with the current microelectronics revolution, it may make more sense to equate their size with sophistication rather than with simplicity ... Without bacteria life on earth could not exist in its present form."
(James A Shipiro, Bacteria as Multicellular Organisms, "Scientific America, Vol.258, No.6 (June 1988))

"Eighty to eighty-five percent of earth's land surface does not have even 3 geological periods appearing in 'correct' consecutive order ... it becomes an overall exercise of gargantuan special pleading and imagination for the evolutionary-uniformitarian paradigm to maintain that there ever were geologic periods."
(John Woodmorappe, geologist)

"That a mindless, purposeless, chance process such as natural selection, acting on the sequels of recombinant DNA or random mutation, most of which are injurious or fatal, could fabricate such complexity and organisation as the vertebrate eye, where each component part must carry out its own distinctive task in a harmoniously functioning optical unit, is inconceivable. The absence of transitional forms between the invertebrates retina and that of the vertebrates poses another difficulty. Here there is a great gulf fixed which remains inviolate with no seeming likelihood of ever being bridged. The total picture speaks of intelligent creative design of an infinitely high order."
(H.S.Hamilton (MD) The Retina of the Eye - An Evolutionary Road Block.)

Mender · Little Guppy Joined: 13 Jul 2005 Posts: 30

Could you please place links to the context in which these were quoted? I feel some of them may have been quoted out of context. The date would be extremely helpful.
For the first one: standard Big Bang theory is currently being dragged out back in preparation for its shooting by Inflationary Cosmology, which presents the answers to many problems the standard theory posed.
The second one: he may have been referring to the fact that you cannot conclusively prove anything in the past.
7th: but there is. Seeing as how creation calls for a much older age than geology currently does...
8th: dwindling magnetic field? How is that related to the age of the world? The poles have been known to flip regularly.
9th: you also cannot put anything in the past to the test, but that does not mean that you did not eat breakfast this morning.
I am not even going to bother myself with the rest. The scientists who hold the view that evolution did not happen are in the minority, and they have yet to come up with a credible, scientifically feasable alternative.

FFT · Posted: Wed Jul 13, 2005 5:43 pm Post subject:

Here are "answers" for two of the quotes.

From Talkorigins.org's Anti-Quote Mining Project

"The pathetic thing is that we have scientists who are trying to prove evolution, which no scientist can ever prove." (Millikan, Robert A., Nashville Banner, August 7, 1925, quoted in Brewer's lecture)

Well, this is from 1925, for one thing. He was a physicist (though a Nobel Prize winner), but not a biologist or otherwise an expert in evolution.
__________________________

"At the present stage of geological research, we have to admit that there is nothing in the geological records that runs contrary to the view of conservative creationists, that God created each species separately, presumably from the dust of the earth." (Dr. Edmund J. Ambrose, The Nature and Origin of the Biological World, John Wiley & Sons, 1982, p. 164)

On the inside back cover of the book, Dr. Ambrose is introduced as Emeritus Professor of Cell Biology, University of London. Is he a creationist? No, he's not, as we'll see. A more complete quote than what was provided would be:

"We need to remember that the only evidence about the way events occurred in the past is found in the geological records. However sophisticated advances in molecular genetics and molecular engineering may become eventually, the fact that a genetic change or even a new species might be generated eventually in the laboratory does not tell us how new species arose in the past history of the earth. They merely provide possible mechanisms. At the present stage of geological research, we have to admit that there is nothing in the geological records that runs contrary to the view of conservative creationists, that God created each species separately, presumably from the dust of the earth. My own view is that this does not strengthen the creationists' arguments."

So Ambrose believes that the fossil record is incomplete, but doesn't feel that this strengthens the creationist's hand. But he does feel that the geological record supports evolution, as we can see on page 103:

"It is strikingly clear in the geological records, when life had reached the stage where organisms were capable of living in a previously unoccupied region of the planet, such as the move from estuaries to dry land, the appearance of plants growing to great heights which provided a location (habitat) for climbing animals, or when birds and insects actually moved up and flew in theair[sp] above the earth's surface. Large numbers of new species appeared at these times; this has been called radiation, a spreading out of life."

And contrary to the seemingly pervasive belief that all evolutionist are atheists, further down the page on which the quote-mined section was on we find this:

"Surely it is not unreasonable to suppose that the Creator utilised existing life forms to generate new forms. I have already suggested that the Creator would operate within the framework of the universe He had created in forming the physical world. May this not be the same for the biological world?"

It seems that Ambrose is a theistic evolutionist.

Mender · Little Guppy Joined: 13 Jul 2005 Posts: 30

Thanks, I knew a few of those were quoted out of context, you rock FFT

RevDave · Posted: Tue Dec 27, 2005 11:45 am Post subject:

FFT · Posted: Tue Dec 27, 2005 11:56 am Post subject:

RevDave · Posted: Tue Dec 27, 2005 12:55 pm Post subject:

Can lying ever lead to a greater good?

I would accept anything that lines up with the Word of God. I believe that my relationship with God depends on my believing everything He said.

FFT · Posted: Tue Dec 27, 2005 1:12 pm Post subject:

SDMD · Show Poodle Joined: 12 Oct 2005 Posts: 253

RevDave · Posted: Tue Dec 27, 2005 5:49 pm Post subject:

FFT · Posted: Tue Dec 27, 2005 6:46 pm Post subject:

Oh?

Ezekiel 26
1 In the eleventh year, on the first day of the month, the word of the Lord came to me:
2 “Son of man, because Tyre has said about Jerusalem, ‘Aha, the gateway of the peoples is broken; it has swung open to me. I will become rich, now that she5 has been destroyed,’
3 therefore this is what the sovereign Lord says: Look, I am against you, O Tyre! I will bring up many nations against you, as the sea brings up its waves.
4 They will destroy the walls of Tyre and break down her towers. I will scrape her soil from her and make her a bare rock.
5 She will be a place where fishing nets are spread, surrounded by the sea. For I have spoken, declares the sovereign Lord. She will become plunder for the nations,
6 and her daughters who are in the field will be slaughtered by the sword. Then they will know that I am the Lord.

This is Tyre:

Seems to me like God lied to Ezekiel, what about you?

SDMD · Show Poodle Joined: 12 Oct 2005 Posts: 253

Nobby · Posted: Tue Dec 27, 2005 9:54 pm Post subject:

FFT, Tyre was distroyed it has been rebuilt. Your just looking for a fuss.

FFT · Posted: Tue Dec 27, 2005 10:26 pm Post subject:

Nobby · Posted: Tue Dec 27, 2005 10:55 pm Post subject:

RevDave, when you make a statement, be sure you can back it up with proof. That's the reason I never get in debates on this forum, I know nothing about evolution or science! I'm a born again christian, & I never did care to study it.