Who Was More Important: Lincoln or Darwin?

Prominent scientists that have expressed (publically) their dissent from Darwinian Evolution.
(17 pages of names)
see "A SCIENTIFIC DISSENT FROM DARWINISM" from the Discovery Institute
link: http://www.dissentfromdarwin.org/
???We are skeptical of claims for the ability of random mutation and natural selection to account for the complexity of life. Careful examination of the evidence for Darwinian theory should be encouraged.???
link: http://www.dissentfromdarwin.org/
This was last publicly updated April 2008. Scientists listed by doctoral degree or current position.

Darwin's theory doesn't destroy anyone's ideals... it just reverted science back several hundred years. That's okay though, science is constantly "proving" itself wrong. I say this because once a THEORY is put into play, it's only typical that science would start basing ALL it's other THEORIES on this, and most teachers would teach it as fact (without solid evidence, other than bits and pieces where fairy tales fill in the blanks... Lucy, anyone?) and blindly guide students into believing this is true - dismissing that there are plenty of missing details, presuming they have been filled in because previous research omitted details. Why do they believe this is science without the missing link? Faith. Faith that the answer will come soon enough. Faith that everything they've been taught in school is true. Faith that previous scientists and their theories were correct. Lincoln is the only of these two who made a positive and decisive impact for the future of the world.

Without any scientific mechanism to explain the transformation from ape to man (genetic mutation explains the loss of functionality for a biological system, not the addition of a system); and subsequent delegation of descent to fictional "common ancestors"; we're still trying to float this scientific lead brick. It is important to note that we don't even believe in Darwinism any more because so much of what Darwin proposed has been disproved. "We" believe in neo-evolution. So what has Darwin taught us? If you're stronger, you can kill the competition to increase your chance of survival and success- might makes right. This evolutionary principle was used to justify the greatest atrocities of the 20th century. A modest guess is 100 million people died because of the pseudo-scientific philosophy- mostly in countries during "peace-time."

The only people that believe in this bogus theory are 1.) people who don't want accountable for behavior, 2.) people that don't read, and 3.) people that hate the concept of God so much, they're willing to sacrifice science and logic for an explanation of the world that excludes God.

My vote is for Darwin. He is still at the center of a storm and he is still rocking the boat! His is the greatest of all ideas because he can and has explained how man became man and we are allowed to be free of a creating and judging God (pick your God, Zeus, Ra, Jesus...). Darwin offers true freedom: freedom of the mind. This is true freedom for mankind.

Religion has never and will never want anyone to be free to think on their own. The men who run the church (opps I mean God) must approve your thoughts and tell you what is best for you. They'll outsource the pesky business of thinking for you.

This is the next great battle for the future of this country. Can this great country surive not getting sucked into the religious vortex that wants to KILL all science and start the dawn of a new dark age? Sound dramatic but the processes are already in place. The red states are ready to kill science and the blue states are under attack. We might be a Christian country in 25-50 years if we don't watch out. Freedom will be dead.

Getting Darwin out of the classroom is just the first step. Erasing the childern's minds by not allowing them access to any opposing ideas and thoughts is the 2nd. Then they can be brainwashed. Just like the creationist on this board. They have been brainwashed to throw facts out there that seem to on the surface to be important but they really never have to explained them in any real detail.

Just like the guys that say we never went to the moon because you don't see stars behind the pictures of the astronauts. Sounds logical and reasonable? But if you left the camera shutter open long enough to capture the light from the very dim stars the very bright light coming off of the astonauts would of been extremely over exposed the picture. It would of been nothing but a washed out white blob.

Maybe this freedom thing is too difficult and requires too much effort. Is there too many football games and beer commericals that need watching? Reading a book or debating the issues require time and effort. Remembering triva is the sign of intelligence rather then be able to think.

There seems to be a lot of ignorance and fear out there as reflected in many of the comments. Some people can benefit a great deal by finding out how science works and by reading some basic information about evolution. Instead, they would rather lash out with propaganda from the religious right. It is sad that so many live in ignorance and love it.

The guy may have spelling and grammatical errors but he is very worth listening to. Einstein needed to write down his train station stop or he would not have know where to depart the train, yet we do not ridicule Einstein's brain. Shame on you for bullying a person and skipping over the substance. That is so typical of those who harbor hatred toward the truth and thus resort to mockery rather than mature intelligible discussion in a fair and open forum. Mutation is caused by other things than pollution BUT mutation does not result in an improvement in the species. That is an important flaw point that has to be reconciled before you can defend a bankrupt theory about upward development when it DOES NOT happen. Automobiles have engineers, furniture has designers, buildings have architects, and living CREATures have a CREATOR. There is no upward advancement in organisms and Darwin obtained these ideas from Mathus who was an economist, not a biology scientist. In the begiining GOD CREATED the heaven and the earth. Also, this newsweek article's writer has stated theory as fact in many places and therefore the article is poor journalism and unacceptable in production. The editor also has failed his or her obligations to the readers. The THEORY of evolution is an unproven THEORY. TRUTH is eventually UNCOVERED; LIES have to be INVENTED. Let us STRIVE to ALWAYS SEEK THE TRUTH.

Lincoln freed men. Darwin's ideas have enslaved and decimated mankind by postulating some groups of people are more "evolved" than others. Hitler took Darwin's postulation to its tragic logical conclusion (survival of the fittest) and millions have died because of it.
Lincoln believed "all men are created equal". and in the image of God. Darwin believed people evolved unequally from pond scum. Read the sub-title of Origin of the Species....or the Preservation of Perferred Races in the Struggle for Life. Compare with the Emancipation Proclamation. Lincoln wins by a landslide!

Jim 6584. I do not challenge the idea that we landed on the moon. I don't know what gave you the idea that people of God are challenging that historical fact. Secondly, you seem to have a narrow viewpoint that people of God want to brainwash their children or all children and people. While the term I labeled "people of God" encompasses a large array of varying beliefs and while there may be many under that umbrella that make the mistake of trying to impose their beliefs upon everyone, this mistake is not supported by scripture. Scripture may command that people of God preach the gospel to every creature but scripture also tells us to declare it, not to argue with people, and most importantly to apply the gospel as if watering a plant wherewith God gives the growth. Thirdly, you have an issue with God as if God can not be TRUSTED to GUIDE you. Take into account that when God made the world He made it perfect and that it was not until man disobeyed God (sinned) that brought problems into the world. It is better to TRUST in God than to put confidence in man. See Psalm 118:8 or just read some money where it says "In GOD we TRUST".

Darwin's THEORY, too often mistaken as Law, has been disproved over and over again and Evolutionists continue to transform his theory so that it may conform to some degree of truth. 1859 was the year that he published his book and the year that America started to forget what our forefathers fought and died for. We hold so steadfast to the idea that we must put ourselves first that we have forgotten the basics of morality. Darwin's book lended itself to the destruction of the foundation of America--a country founded on Christian principles and beliefs. It taught people to be disregard God because if evolution is true then we evolved from Monkeys instead of being created in His image. If there is no God, then there is no reason to hold the teachings of Jesus and the Bible in high regards. Without those teachings, there comes a demise of morality. What we are left with is what we are witnessing now--a culture full of death and destruction. Without morality, there is no governing a free people for a free nation can only survive if the people to be governed govern themselves. How can we do that if we don't even have a standard of moralityor an absolute moral truth? When we do not control our own behaviors, that is when democracy fails and gives way to a dictatorship. Darwin was wrong. There is a God. There is a purpose to our lives. And there is such a thing as absolute truth. Lincoln wins.

Can you summarize them in a line or two for us......most of us are not "thinkers" per se.......

I' reposting my comment below up here because I'm feeling somewhat argumentative:

Comment: Ok, the appendix CAN'T go away completely because every person that has a variation of the appendix which is smaller DIES usually without reproducing and therefor does not pass on the genes for a smaller appendix.

The human eye acutually isn't that great, cephalopods have way better eye designs than we do. That's because natural selection doesn't result in the best possible design, it just results in a design that's good enough without using up too many resources. Basically if it ain't broke, evolution don't fix it (unless something else does it better for less).

There are TONS of examples of intermmediate species, scientists discover more all the time.

Basically all of the "scientific" arguments against evolution given here are wrong. Just because most biologists have better things to do than correct your ignorance does not make you right. I don't argue about what te bible says without having read the book. If you want to argue evolution with a real biologist, spend the next 8 years educating yourself on the subject and then talk to me.

For those of you who are not so stuck as to not have you ideas changed I would like to suggest two books "Darwin's Black Box" by Michael Behe (be ready to think while you read) and "The Case For A Creator" by Lee Strobel

We all agree autos have engineers, furniture has designers, and buildings have designers, meaning every thing had to come from somewhere. The leap of faith becomes, we came from an explosion or some ooze, or, we came from a designer higher than ourselves. Many are examining a theory that we are the offspring of intergalactic criminals, who were sent here as punishment. If you'd like to hear more about this theory, please send 250.00 to me, in the form of a cashiers check or money order. I HAVE THE ANSWERS.

Last post was directed at themtb2007. I'm also seeing multiple duplicate posts show- I don't think I sent it more than once but I'll apologize anyway. I never got a decent answer on the mechanism of mutation in evolution. I'm guessing there isn't an explanation?

I would also like to point out that all of the people that think they're "rocking the boat" by challenging the stuffy scientists with these hard questions, um yeah, think again. Science is ALL ABOUT challenging established thought. We do that on a regular basis. That's why the theory of evolution evolves over time, because people challenge it and new evidence is added to our understanding. ALL scientific theories undergoe this process, it doesn't make the theory wrong. And you can't have it both ways, either we're unwilling to accept challenges to our sacred theory, or we're obviously wrong because we change our theories when confronted with new evidence, PICK ONE!

If evolution is the way we got here why have we stopped evolving? Why are there still monkeys? Why do we still have an appendix? If we can have it surgically removed with no adverse affect why hasn't it evolved out of us?