The Evolution of Man Scientifically Disproved in 50 ArgumentsWilliams, William A. (William Asbury)
Religion
The Evolution of Man Scientifically Disproved in 50 Arguments
Williams, William A. (William Asbury)
Evolution
Many arguments gravely given in support of evolution, reveal a great
poverty of facts and logic. An instantaneous photograph of an “infant,
three weeks old, supporting its own weight for over two minutes,” is
given by Romanes as a proof that man is descended from a simian
(ape-like) ancestor. As this same picture is widely copied in evolution
text books, they must have failed to get the picture of any other
infant performing a like feat. Just how this affords any convincing
proof that man is a monkey, we leave the reader to figure out. Our
attention is called to the way this child and another child, whose
picture is likewise generally copied, hold their feet (like monkeys
climbing trees) showing they are little monkeys. Though we fail to see
the force of this argument, it must be among their best from the
emphasis they give it. Prof. H. H. Newman, of Chicago University, a
leading evolutionist actually writes as follows, (Readings): “The
common cotton-tail rabbit raises its white tail when it runs. This is
interpreted [by whom, evolutionists or rabbits?] as a signal of danger
to other rabbits.”
The following absurd speculation, by a lecturer in the “University
Extension Course,” was printed in the Philadelphia Bulletin: “Evidence
that early man climbed trees with their feet lies in the way we wear
the heels of our shoes,—more at the outside. A baby can wiggle its big
toe without wiggling its other toes,—an indication that it once used
its big toe in climbing trees. We often dream of falling. Those who
fell out of the trees some 50,000 years ago and were killed, of course,
had no descendants (?) So those who fell and were not hurt, of course,
lived, and so we are never hurt in our dreams of falling”! While we
read these feeble arguments, which the newspapers would call piffle,
how can we escape the conviction that evolution is in desperate need of
argument? Imagine the Copernican theory relying on such piffle for
support. Is there a freak idea without a freak professor to support it?
27. TWENTY OBJECTIONS ADMITTED
Evolutionists themselves, even including Darwin, admit as many as 20
objections to his theory. Darwin states the first four and Prof. V. L.
Kellogg sums up the remaining 16 on pp. 247-52 of “Readings in
Evolution.” Among them are:—
1. There must have been innumerable transitional forms in the formation
of new species. No convincing evidence of these missing links exists.
2. Natural selection can not account for the instinct of animals such
as that of the honey bee, “which has practically anticipated the
discoveries of profound mathematicians.”
4. The offspring of such nearly related species as can be crossed are
sterile, showing that nature discourages and in no wise encourages the
formation of new species.
5. The changes resulting from the use and disuse of organs are not
inherited.
6. Since Darwinism eliminates design, it is only the exploded ancient
heathen doctrine of chance.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account