T. Belman. Many decades ago, Commentary Mag posted an article by Berlinski in which he “proved” that Darwin was wrong. It caused a huge stir and a deluge of comments from many of the experts which necessitated publication over the next three issues. It was so much fun to follow.
Unfortunately his comments regarding Islam and antisemitism expressed at the end of the discussion were off putting.
Is Charles Darwin’s theory fundamentally deficient? David Berlinski makes his case, noting that most species enter the evolutionary order fully formed and then depart unchanged. Where there should be evolution, there is stasis. So, was Darwin wrong?
David Berlinski is a senior fellow at the Discovery Institute’s Center for Science and Culture, a contributing editor at Inference: International Review of Science, and author of many books. Berlinski discusses his book The Deniable Darwin and lays out how Charles Darwin has failed to explain the origin of species through his theory of evolution.
Berlinski explains that change in biology is not continuous—it’s radical, something which Darwinian theory fails to explain. He discusses how Darwinian evolution is blind to the future as there is no fidelity to the facts. He gives examples of amino acids and dogs and explains why there cannot be just one species. He further strengthens his statement by saying that everything cannot be accounted for as being random: there should be some scientific evidence to support it.
Berlinski responds to Peter Robinson’s question about Razib Khan’s statement to the effect that, “The seeds of both tyranny and democracy were sown by the evolutionary pressures that shaped humans over millions of years.” He argues that the deepest aspects of our nature are not formed by evolutionary pressures because evolution is relatively neutral. He also replies to Robinson’s question about a remark of Pope Benedict XVI to the effect that Western thought, by its very nature, “excludes the question of God, making it appear an unscientific or pre-scientific question.” He explains that it is not right to argue that physical theories imply that the conclusion is antitheist, as mere exclusion in these theories does not imply that.
Robinson further asks Berlinski’s views about the growing population of Islam and decreasing population of Europeans in Europe. Berlinski explains that Muslims take religion seriously, but theology/religion has more or less disappeared from the Western habit of thought. He states that faith and religion should come together.
Berlinski further talks about how Albert Einstein’s comments disprove God, not because he is an antitheist, but because Einstein wanted to push quantum theory and his belief in the rational universe.
Finally, Robinson asks about Europe’s survival in terms of economy, population, and growth, and Berlinski says that the nation-state is an idea that is no longer there and that patriotism is disappearing.
Only life can create life. So prior to life existing on earth, a living being must have created it.
The idea that a bunch of inert chemicals got together by pure chance billions/millions of years ago to create a single celled life form and from the single cell evolved the teeming array of life forms we see on earth today is, in my view, totally absurd.
Only somebody who cannot deal with the idea of a Divine Creator to whom mankind must seek, if they want something greater than a few decades of miserable mortality, could dream up such nonscientific bilge.
No one faults Darwin for being wrong at the time. The criticism is intended for those who today think he was right. Most people think evolution is a better theory than creation.
How could we expect Darwin to figure out everything (pre-formal genetics and DNA)? In fact many of these supposed criticisms are now orthodox beliefs of most biologists and do not contradict Darwin’s ideas. We speak of evolutionary time and don’t expect a living organism to evolve before our eyes. We know a lot more about most aspects of science than we did in the mid 1800s, and it is silly to criticize a pioneer and one of the greatest minds in history for not having today’s knowledge, which of course stems from the work on thousands of individuals.