< Francis Crick [co-discoverer of DNA's structure] said that the odds of synthesizing the long amino acid chains is impossible.
Life Itself: Its Origin and Nature (New York: Simon & Schuster, 1981) 192 pp.
"If a particular amino acid sequence was selected by chance, how rare an event would this be?
"This is an easy exercise in combinatorials. Suppose the chain is about two hundred amino acids long; this is, if anything rather less than the average length of proteins of all types. Since we have just twenty possibilities at each place, the number of possibilities is twenty multiplied by itself some two hundred times. This is conveniently written 20200 and is approximately equal to 10260, that is, a one followed by 260 zeros.
" Moreover, we have only considered a polypeptide chain of rather modest length. Had we considered longer ones as well, the figure would have been even more immense. The great majority of sequences can never have been synthesized at all, at any time." pp. 51-52
"An honest man, armed with all the knowledge available to us now, could only state that in some sense, the origin of life appears at the moment to be almost a miracle, so many are the conditions which would have had to have been satisfied to get it going." p. 88
- http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Acropolis/1082/quotesof.htm
< Millions of monkeys isn't a workable example of Evolution
Hoyle, Sir Fred, and Chandra Wickramasinghe, Evolution from Space (New York: Simon & Schuster, 1984), 176 pp.
"No matter how large the environment one considers, life cannot have had a random beginning. Troops of monkeys thundering away at random on typewriters could not produce the works of Shakespeare, for the practical reason that the whole observable universe is not large enough to contain the necessary monkey hordes, the necessary typewriters, and certainly not the waste paper baskets required for the deposition of wrong attempts. The same is true for living material."
"The likelihood of the spontaneous formation of life from inanimate matter is one to a number with 40,000 noughts after it. It is big enough to bury Darwin and the whole theory of evolution. There was no primeval soup, neither on this planet nor on any other, and if the beginnings of life were not random, they must therefore have been the product of purposeful intelligence." p. 148
- http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Acropolis/1082/quotesof.htm
Quotes from reputable scientists and researchers (not explicitly pro-evolution or pro-creation):
"Today [1977] our duty is to destroy the myth of evolution, considered as a simple, understood and explained phenomenon which keeps rapidly unfolding before us. Biologists must be
encouraged to think about the weaknesses and extrapolations that theoreticians put forward or lay down as established truths. The deceit is sometimes unconscious, but not always, since some people, owing to their sectarianism, purposely overlook reality and refuse to acknowledge the inadequacies and falsity of their beliefs."
- Pierre-Paul Grasse, past President of the French Academie des Sciences, Editor of the 35-volume Traite de Zoologie
"Evolutionism is a fairy tale for grownups. This theory has helped nothing in the progress of science. It is useless."
- Bounoure, past Director of Research at the National Center of Scientific Research, France: (_Le Monde Et La Vie_, Oct 1963)
"We must bear in mind that just because neo-Darwinian evolution is the most plausible naturalistic explanation of origins, we should not assume that it is necessarily true.... In retrospect, it seems as though Darwinists have been less concerned with the scientific question of accurately explaining the empirical data of natural history, and more concerned with the religious or philosophical question of explaining the design found in nature without a designer. Darwin's general theory of evolution may, in the final analysis, be little more than an unwarranted extrapolation from microevolution based more upon philosophy than fact. The problem is that Darwinism continues to distort natural science."
- Art Battson, professor, University of CA - Berkley: ("Facts, Fossils, and Philosophy", 17 May 1997)
"The philosophy of evolution is based upon assumptions that cannot be scientifically verified... Whatever evidence can be assembled for evolution is both limited and circumstantial in nature."
- G.A. Kerkut, biochemistry professor at the University of Southampton: (cited in _Biology_, Keith Graham et al, p.363)
"It is in fact a common fantasy, promulgated mostly by the scientific profession itself, that in the search for objective truth, data dictate conclusions. Data are just as often molded to fit preferred
conclusions."
- Roger Lewin: (_Bones of Contention_, p.68)
"I have come to believe that many statements we make about the how and whys of human evolution say as much about us, the paleoanthropologists and the larger society in which we live, as about anything that really happened."
- David Pilbeam: (cited in _Bones of Contention_, Roger Lewin, p.85)
"Evolution is unproved and unprovable. We believe it only because the only alternative is special creation which is unthinkable."
- Arthur Keith: (cited in _Origins?_, BG Ranganathan, p.22)
"This situation, where men rally to the defense of a doctrine they are unable to define scientifically, much less demonstrate with scientific rigor, attempting to maintain its credit with the public by the suppression of criticism and the elimination of difficulties, is abnormal and undesirable in science.... I am not satisfied that Darwin proved his point or that his influence in scientific and public thinking has been beneficial."
- W.R. Thompson, Introduction to _Origin of the Species_ by Darwin:
"Every time I write a paper on the origin of life, I determine I will never write another one, because there is too much speculation running after too few facts."
- Francis Crick, Nobel Prize recipient for discovery of DNA structure: (_Life Itself_, p.153)
"Evolution is baseless and quite incredible."
- John Ambrose Fleming, President British Assoc. for Advancement of Science: (_The Unleashing of Evolutionary Thought_)
"The hold of the evolutionary paradigm is so powerful that an idea which is more like a principle of medieval astrology than a serious 20th century scientific theory has become a reality for
evolutionary biologists.... The overriding supremacy of the myth has created a widespread illusion that the theory of evolution was all but proved 100 years ago and that all subsequent biological research - paleontological, zoological and in the newer branches of genetics and molecular biology - has provided ever-increasing evidence of Darwinian ideas... There has always existed a significant minority of first-rate biologists who have never been able to bring themselves to accept the validity of Darwinian claims. In fact, the number of biologists who have expressed some degree of disillusionment is practically endless... Ultimately the Darwinian theory of evolution is no more nor less than the great cosmogenic myth of the 20th century. Like the Genesis-based cosmology which it replaced, and like the creation myths of ancient man, it satisfies the same deep psychological need for an all-embracing explanation for the origin of the world which has motivated all the cosmogenic myth makers of the past."
- Michael Denton: (_Evolution: A Theory in Crisis_, p.306, 327, 358.)
"The main thrust of the criticism [of Darwinism] comes from within science itself. The doubts about Darwinism represent a political revolt from within rather than a siege from without."
- B. Leith: (_The Descent of Darwin: A Handbook of Doubts about Darwinism_, p.11)
"The explanatory value of the hypothesis of common ancestry is nil... I feel that the effects of the hypotheses of common ancestry in
systematics has not been merely boring, not just a lack of knowledge, I think it has been positively anti-knowledge... Well, we're back to the question I've been putting to people: 'Is there one thing you can tell me about evolution?' The absence of answers seems to suggest that it is true: evolution does not convey any knowledge, or if so, I haven't yet heard it."
- Dr. Colin Patterson, paleontologist at the British Museum of Natural History: (from speech at the American Museum of Natural History, NYC, Nov 5, 1981)
"The theory of evolution is a scientific mistake."
- Louis Agassiz, Harvard professor, pioneer in glaciation: (cited in H. Enoch, _Evolution or Creation_, p.139)
"I have already shown that the arguments advanced by the early champions [of Darwinian theory of natural selection] were not very compelling, and that there are now [1987] considerable numbers of empirical facts which do not
fit with the theory. Hence, to all intents and purposes the theory has been falsified, so why has it not been abandoned?"
- S. Lovtrup, professor of zoophysiology at Universityof Umea, Sweden: (_Darwinism: The Refutation of a Myth_ p.352)
Quotes compiled by: Hannah Newman
- http://searchlight.iwarp.com/articles/evolution.html
| < Prev | Next > |
|---|
