Defending and Commending the Faith With Dr. Joe L. Mott, inviting the atheist, agnostic and skeptic to examine for themselves

Joe Mott
  • 3.3 (7)
  • Christianity
  • Updated Biweekly

Dr. Joe Mott earned his PhD at LSU, and was a distinguished math professor at Florida State University for 38 years years, helping to write 3 math textbooks, and authoring over 30 research articles in math.

  1. 2d ago

    False Ideas About Truth - Part 22 - Evidence against Darwinian Evolution

    References: (1) The Miller-Urey experiment used a mixture of organic chemicals presumably MIMICKING a PRIMORDIAL SEA despite the fact that no one has ever SEEN or ANALYZED the contents of the primordial sea. (2) But the Miller-Urey experiment FALSELY led people to think that scientists could CREATE LIFE in a test tube because the experiment could create SOME of the building blocks of life. But these building blocks produced by the experiment was only a FEW amino acids FAR REMOVED from what is needed for life. Nevertheless the myth of the Miller-Urey experiment still remains in school textbooks COMPLETELY OVERLOOKING  the problems with this experiment. (3) The medical doctor Geoffrey Simmons and author of the books  What Darwin Didn’t Know and Billions of Missing Links used the fact of MISSING TRANSITIONAL LINKS and the SHAKINESS of Darwin’s claims to say that Darwin’s claims NO LONGER RISES the level of a theory but perhaps only to a proposal of historical importance. (4) Drawing on the most recent research  and on years of clinical work Simmons tells the REAL STORY about the human body’s amazing complexity. The book “What Darwin Didn’t Know” pictures the wonders of the human body in their TRUE CONTEXT — a marvelous system fashioned by an infinitely wise DESIGNER. (5) In the book Billions of Missing Links Simmons reveals how interdependent structures and systems — massive complexity upon massive complexity —  apparently came about ALL AT ONCE, WHOLE AND ENTIRE. There are NO PRECEDENTS, NO IN-BETWEENS, NO MISTAKES, NO FIRST TRIES. So there is NO HINT of things happening by CHANCE. (6) Simmons is not particularly fond of Darwin’s personality. He says, “Much of Darwin’s work reflects prejudices, false assumptions, assumed natural laws, and feigned research projects, as well as the reasonable thoughts of unnamed colleagues. Among the notables who have adopted his conclusions have been Hitler, Marx, and Stalin.” To those I would add Mao Zedong, Fidel Castro, Hugo Chavez, Nicholas Madura, and Pol Pot. (7) The Bible says that wisdom is JUSTIFIED by all its CHILDREN. In other words, things like accepted cultural ideas, myths, worldviews, philosophies, politics, etc. enter to give a fuller picture of the character of a person. (8) The eugenics movement will forever be associated with Adolf Hitler, whose quest to build an Aryan MASTER RACE during the 1930s and '40s culminated in the Holocaust, the extermination of 6 millions Jews as well as all the deaths of multitudes of soldiers in WWII. That is a child of Darwinism. (9) For over 40 years Dr. Jerry Bergman, with 7 graduate degrees in biology, chemistry, psychology, and evaluation and reseasrch, has chronicled the weakness and absence of evidence supporting the theory of Darwinian evolution. Don’t you think that Bergman with those credentials deserves an audience? (10) The American eugenics movement received extensive funding from various CORPORATE FOUNDATIONS including the Carnegie Institution (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carnegie_Institution), Rockefeller Foundation (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rockefeller_Foundation), and the Harriman (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edward_Henry_Harriman) railroad fortune. In 1906, J.H. Kellogg (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/J.H._Kellogg) provided funding to help found the Race Betterment Foundation (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Race_Betterment_Foundation) in Battle Creek, Michigan (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_Creek,_Michigan). The Eugenics Record Office (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eugenics_Record_Office)(ERO) was founded in Cold Spring Harbor, New York (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cold_Spring_Harbor,_New_York) in 1911 by the renowned biologist Charles B. Davenport (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charles_B._Davenport), using money from both the Harriman railroad fortune and the Carnegie Institution. (11) Eugenics allowed some people to JUSTIFY THEIR BIGOTRY who then would take things a STEP FURTHER by claiming that "lesser" races needed to be PHASED OUT. In this way, SOCIAL DARWINISM became a means to construct a supposed HEIRARCHY of race — and ensure that Caucasian people (and their genes) remained the ideal standard. This idea of heirarchy of races affected Hitler where he thought the Aryan race was the MASTER RACE. Eugenics and Social Darwinism are the children of Darwinism. (12) Before Hitler took eugenics to its DEADLY EXTREMES of executing millions, many people considered at least some eugenics-related ideas to be COMPLETELY LEGITIMATE — despite their SERIOUS MORAL IMPLICATIONS. (13) What is the lesson learned here? Here is one: Any bias can be taken to extremes, hatred can ensue, and people can lose their lives. We see it now in the Trump DERANGEMENT SYNDROME which has precipitated multiple assassination attempts against the president of the United States. We saw it Charlie Kirk’s murder. We see it in school, places of worship, and drive-by shootings. It manifests itself when a few radical nations want to wipe out another nation. We see it exhibitions of genocide. (14) When will the world recognize that hatred can destroy everything we hold dear? Rather than supporting eugenics that removes people, we need to excise the cancer of hatred. This is episode 289.

  2. Aug 10

    False Ideas About Truth - Part 21 - The Bridge of Evolution is Faulty

    References: (1) Charles Darwin’s 1859 book “Origin of Species” produced a REVOLUTION in human thinking perhaps more profound in science than anything before or since. The 16th century Copernican revolution removed the EARTH from its privileged position at the center of the universe, but the Darwinian theory removed GOD from His privileged position as the Creator of the universe and of all life, most notably of human life. (2) We are asked to believe that, first, a tiny BACTERIUM had come from non-living matter, and then, second, that it has evolved into 1.7 million highly complex species. The evidence supporting evolution would have to SPAN A VERY LARGE GAP between non-life and human life. Is the evidence strong enough? I am trying to show that it does not. (3) Now, thanks to the scientific work of Albert Einstein and other scientists, the beginning of the universe has been confirmed. That proves that a BEGINNER, a Creator, exists. Thanks to space probes and high-powered telescopes, we can determine the age of the universe to be about 13.7 or 13.8 billion years old. General relativity has been confirmed also. (4)”Not by Chance” by Lee Spetner. (5) “The Blind Watchman” by Richard Dawkins. (6) The 1952 article in “American Scientist” by Richard Goldsmith says, “Evolution of animal and plant world is considered by all those entitled to judgment to be a FACT for which NO FURTHER PROOF is needed.” (7) The mechanisms — natural selection, random mutations, and abiogenesis — have to work correctly in order for what is claimed to really occur. (8) The transfer of one species to another has NEVER BEEN OBSERVED, and how life came from non-life is still a MYSTERY. (9) It seems to me that the bridge of evolution is a failure. (10) In the case of evolution, the entire sequence of evidence must be strong or Darwin’s theory will fall apart. One broken element in the evolutionary span is all it takes for the theory to be a FAILURE. (11) “A Skeptics Search for God” and “Dismantling Evolution” by Ralph Muncaster. (12) Darwin himself identified 37 problems of evolution that needed to be defended. (13) I began to list key elements of evidence against Darwinian evolution although it is almost universally accepted. This is episode 288.

  3. Aug 3

    False Ideas About Truth - Part 20 - Darwin and Lamarckianism

    References: (1) “Lamarck, the Founder of Evolution” by Alpheas Packard. (2) Questions: What hard-science evidence is there that Darwinian evolution is true? Why are there no true transitional links? Since there are no transitional links to test, is it possible to demonstrate hard evidence of DNA mutational change? (3) “Dismantling Evolution” by Ralph Muncaster. (4) Given that neo-Darwinism requires GRADUAL CHANGE over long periods of time, how do evolutionists explain the sudden appearance of many new life forms on earth in the Cambrian Explosion? (5) Muncaster continues, “The existence of ‘transitional’ species would imply that a creature was in a STATE OF DEVELOPMENT between two species. For example, it might be a reptile with a partially formed feather, not a wholly developed one; or a creature with a part of an eye that didn’t yet ‘work.’ Now, even though millions of fossils have been found since Darwin’s time, we still can’t IDENTIFY transitional species — let alone ’countless numbers’ of them. In fact, in the fossil record body parts and systems are either FULLY FORMED or NON EXISTENT.” (6) What is harder to understand is WHY this 150-year-old theory (though somewhat modified) is STILL BEING TAUGHT as a FACT in light of recent discoveries? (7) However, change BETWEEN species has NEVER BEEN SUBSTANTIATED. (8) “Now, having much recent evidence that was UNAVAILABLE to Darwin, how do MODERN EVOLUTIONISTS support their theory? It seems that, often, either they attempt to hold onto OUTDATED IDEAS by the simple ASSUMPTION that evolution is a FACT — or else the evidence is simply IGNORED. In other cases they explain the theory’s many problems by REACHING INTO OUTER SPACE for answers. . . . Are evolutionary theorists now so FRUSTRATED that they look to extraterrestrials as possible SOLUTIONS to problems about the origin of life that can’t be resolved? Moreover, this just puts the difficulties one step FURTHER AWAY. It doesn’t answer the question, ‘How did these extraterrestrials come to be?’” (9) The third area into which flaws of evolution can be separated is the way Darwinian evolutionary theory has been used as the FOUNDATIONAL BASIS for POLITICAL SYSTEMS like Nazism and communism. Those governmental regimes adopted the idea of atheism. (10) What were the consequences of the governmental regimes of Nazism and communism? Nazism caused the Holocaust thereby destroying over 6 million Jews and perhaps 10 million Christians. Josef Stalin left seminary after having read Darwin’s book becoming an atheist in the process. Ultimately over 18 million Russians were killed under Stalin’s regime in Russia. Marxism/communism in China under Mao destroyed over 100 million Chinese. Marxism/communism was responsible for Pol Pot’s killing fields in Cambodia whereby over half of the population of Cambodia were destroyed. (11) Darwin’s theory of evolution also was the FOUNDATION for theories like SOCIAL DARWINISM and EUGENICS. You may know that eugenics advocates for the elimination of individual people DEEMED SOCIALLY UNFIT. The theories of social Darwinism and eugenics have been used to JUSTIFY DISCRIMINATION and have contributed to some of the most RACIST social programs over the last 167 years. (12) “Darwin’s Black Box” by Michael Behe. This is episode 287.

  4. Jul 27

    False Ideas About Truth - Part 19 - Tactics Against Darwinism’s Opponents

    References: (1) Ever since Darwin first published his Origin of Species, his defenders’ favorite TACTIC against critics have been to use the process with a Latin name ad hominem which means attack against the person. For example, Sir Richard Dawkins, the indefatigable defender of evolution and former professor of biology at the University of Oxford, wrote: “It is absolutely SAFE TO SAY that if you meet someone who claims NOT TO BELIEVE IN EVOLUTION, that person is IGNORANT, STUPID, or INSANE (or WICKED, but I’d rather not consider that).” (2) In the book “Darwinism Under the Microscope” by James P. Gillis, MD and Tom Woodward, PHD and in the chapter by Dr. Mark Hartwig called “Challenging Darwin’s Myths” is stated that “Darwin himself used [this tactic] against some of the greatest scientists of his day, accusing them of SUPERSTITION and RELIGIOUS BIAS.” (3) Hartwig continues, “Time has not been kind to Darwinism, however. Paleontologists have certainly found more fossils, but these fossils have only DEEPENED THE PROBLEM. What paleontologists discovered was NOT GRADUAL CHANGE, but STABILITY AND SUDDEN APPEARANCE. It seems that most fossil species APPEAR ALL AT ONCE, FULLY FORMED, and CHANGE VERY LITTLE THROUGHOUT THEIR EXISTENCE. (4) Even Oxford zoologist and prominent Darwinist Richard Dawkins has remarked, “It  is as though they were JUST PLANTED THERE, without ANY EVOLUTIONARY HISTORY. . . . Darwinists, of course, express CONFIDENCE that future discoveries will clear up the mysteries. But so far, the research has only deepened them.” I would say confidence is NOT EVIDENCE. (5)  An article from gotquestions.org indicates that FLAWS in the theory of evolution can be separated into 3 BASIC AREAS. I have added a fourth category. (6) Generally in the first edition of The Origin of Species Darwin made claims with NO SUPPORTING EVIDENCE. How can that version of Darwinian evolution be a SCIENCE if it does not use the scientific methodology? (7) Survival of the fittest on a short time line, is UNIVERSALLY ACCEPTED. But this is more about MAJOR TRANSITIONS. No scientist has ever observed a natural collection of organic chemicals SPONTANEOUSLY linking up to form a PROTEIN, or thousands of different proteins, fats, sugars, and minerals combining to CREATE A FUNCTIONAL CELL, or millions of different cells FUSING INTO A JELLYFISH, or anything remotely similar to an AMPHIBIAN, or a frog transitioning to a lizard, of a bear transitioning to a whale, or an ape GIVING BIRTH to a human. (8) The philosopher and historian Stephen Meyer writes, “Intelligent agents have unique CAUSAL POWERS that nature DOES NOT . When we observe effects that we know only agents can produce, we rightly INFER the presence of a PRIOR INTELLIGENCE even if we did not observe the ACTION of the particular agent responsible. Since DNA displays an effect (namely, information content) that in our experience only agents can produce, intelligent design (and not apparent design) stands as the best explanation for the information content in DNA.” This is episode 286.

  5. Jul 20

    False Ideas About Truth - Part 18 - Additional Questions About Darwinian Evolution

    References: (1) Many people have been taught evolution as an UNQUESTIONABLE FACT while being UNAWARE of the numerous historical errors, frauds, exaggerations, and premature conclusions that have appeared in its defense. (2) Remember Science is performed by fallible people. A PREDETERMINED BIAS can influence scientific conclusions. Incorrect ideas sometimes remain in textbooks for decades. Scientific consensus does not guarantee the truth. (3) Darwin acknowledged that there were “a crowd of difficulties” with his theory and stated, “Some of them are SO SERIOUS that to this day I can HARDLY REFLECT on them without being in some degree STAGGERED; but, to the best of my judgment, the greater number are ONLY APPARENT, and those that ARE REAL are not, I think, FATAL to the theory.” (4) Notice one thing about Darwin’s response at the end of the above quotation: Objections to his theory are not fatal. He offers no evidence for that claim. That relegates his response to just an OPINION. Here is basic fact in my mind: Opinions DO NOT SOLVE scientific problems. (5) The consequences for man — of Darwins’ theory — were clear. Man was no longer at the center of the living world. The human was not a created Being made in the image of God. Neither was the human the product of a Divine Plan — evolution does NOT have a plan. (6) E. J. Larson, author of the 2002 book The Theory of Evolution: A History of Controversy writes on p. 58 “that Darwin did what he could to document his view that natural selection was a PLAUSIBLE MECHANISM — not necessarily the BEST mechanism, but at least a plausible one, because he needed at least SOME MECHANISM that was better than Lamarck’s theory, in order to have people buy into his theory of evolution. His mechanism was natural selection.” (7) Of course, artificial selection no more PROVES evolution than the fact that humans have built computers proves that a computer can evolve solely by natural means without intelligence. (8) Most surprisingly, Darwin RETREATED BACK to the DISCREDITED theory of evolution due to Lamarck, which postulated that biological characteristics acquired during one’s lifetime could be passed onto one’s offspring. (9) B. Houston, author of the 2012 book Natural God: Deism in the Age of Intelligent Design, wrote that for Darwin, even the term “evolve” itself evolved. In the first edition of Origin of the Species published in 1859, [Darwin] uses only forms of the word “descent” rather than “evolution.” Not until the sixth edition, published in 1872, does Darwin use the word evolution (found on p. 124 of Natural God). (10) Cambridge University professor Peter Vorzimmer wrote in an article entitled “Charles Darwin and blending inheritance” in Isis vol. 54, 1963, p. 371 that “the evolutionary writings of Charles Darwin. . . . in the latter part of his life, when CONTRASTED with the Origin of Species in 1859, indicate a considerable CHANGE in his evolutionary thought over the intervening years . . . . the overall CHANGE effected appears GREAT and the resultant view nearly ANTITHETICAL to that of the first edition of the Origin, . . . . [and] such a RADICAL CHANGE could not be looked upon merely as a MODIFICATION of an earlier view, but as an ADOPTION of a DISTINCTLY new one.” (11) In the introduction to a 1971 edition of Darwin’s book, the biologist L. Harrison Matthews observes, “The fact of evolution is the BACKBONE of biology, and biology is thus in a PECULIAR POSITION of being a science founded on an UNPROVED THEORY — is it then a SCIENCE or a FAITH? Belief in the theory of evolution is thus EXACTLY PARALLEL to belief in SPECIAL CREATION — both are CONCEPTS which believers know to be true but neither, up to the present, had been able to prove.” (12) Michael Behe is the American microbiologist who introduced the concept of irreducible complexity in his book Darwin’s Black Box. He argues that some biological systems, like the eye, are IRREDUCIBLY COMPLEX — that is, they consist of multiple interacting parts, ALL OF WHICH ARE NECESSARY for the system’s PRESENT FUNCTION. According to Behe, such systems could not have arisen through the GRADUAL ACCUMULATION of small, beneficial mutations envisioned by Darwinian evolution because the system would not function until ALL THE PARTS were present. For example, all parts of a mouse trap must be present for it to work as a mouse trap. If even one part is missing, it will not work. (13) I would say there is no conceivable way to account naturally for their development. Therefore, there must be an INTELLIGENT DESIGNER. This is episode 285.

  6. Jul 13

    False Ideas About Truth - Part 17 - More Questions About Darwinian Evolution

    References: (1) Question 8. Does the Cambrian Explosion prove Darwin’s theory of evolution? (2) Darwin predicted that in the fossil record we would find EVIDENCE that life would begin SIMPLY and would progress into BIG DIFFERENCES. But the Cambrian Explosion refutes that prediction and thus DOES NOT SUPPORT DARWIN’s THEORY of evolution. (3) Question 9. Was there a gradual transition from an ape to human? (4) Despite the illustrations in textbooks showing a march of beings in an ascending row that displays a gradual transition from a small chimpanzee to a regular sized ape to an even larger transition figure and eventually to a human, no evidence is offered to support that illustration because it is NOT THERE. Virtually every “missing link” or “find” has turned out to be APE-LIKE and NON HUMAN, not a transition kind of an ape-man. In fact, some so-called “finds” were deliberate HOAXES. (5) Charles Darwin was worried that the fossil record did not show what his theory predicted. In the 6th edition of The Origin of Species he wrote: “Why is not EVERY GEOLOGICAL FORMATION which can be urged and EVERY STRATUM full of such intermediate links? Geology assuredly does not reveal any such finely graduated organic chain; and this is the most obvious and serious OBJECTION which can be urged against the theory.” (6) This means that Darwin’s theory is REFUTED. In EVERY OTHER SCIENTIFIC DOMAIN — in mathematics, physics, chemistry, astronomy, computer science, and perhaps in geology, meteorology, oceanography, and even in philosophy — if such a counterexample is displayed against their theory, then the theory would be abandoned. But not so in Darwinian theory. THAT is NOT SCIENCE; that’s burying your head in the sand and keeping your mind closed. The mind is like a parachute; it only works when it is open. (7) However, if different kinds had been created SEPARATELY, the fossil record should show creatures appearing ABRUPTLY AND FULLY FORMED. That is what the Cambridge Explosion shows. Shouldn’t the general public and the scientific community be open to the possibility of creation? (8) Richard Leakey, in his time the world’s foremost paleoanthropologist, said, “If pressed about man’s ANCESTRY, I would have to UNEQUIVOCALLY SAY that all we have is a HUGE QUESTION MARK. . . . If, further pressed, I would have to state that there is MORE EVIDENCE to suggest an ABRUPT ARRIVAL of man rather than a GRADUAL PROCESS of evolving.” (9) The renowned Harvard paleontologist Stephen Jay Gould wrote in the book Evolution Now: A Century After Darwin edited by John Maynard Smith, p. 140: “The ABSENCE of fossil evidence for INTERMEDIATE STAGES between major transitions in organic design, indeed in our INABILITY, even in our IMAGINATION, to construct functional intermediates in many cases, has been a PERSISTENT AND NAGGING PROBLEM for gradualistic accounts of evolution.” (10) You might recall that Gould is the one who said, “Evolution is a fact, fact, fact.” It seems to me that he should have considered the fossil record before making that comment. If he had, then he should have said, “ Evolution is dubious, dubious, dubious.” This is episode 284.

  7. Jul 6

    False Ideas About Truth - Part 16 - Questions and Answers About Darwinian Evolution

    References: (1) An important topic in any discussion of Darwinian evolution is the major problem of blunders, frauds, and forgeries made by evolutionists. How can anyone consider Darwinian evolution to be TRUE if it is characterized by frauds? Would you purchase an insurance policy if the company has a record of frauds? No, but many people accept Darwinian evolution despite its connection with frauds and forgeries. (2) Question 4: Does the Miller-Urey experiment prove that LIFE can be built by natural process? (3) No, the conclusions drawn from the Miller-Urey experiment are no longer considered RELEVANT by the scientific community. In fact, the experiment has been CRITICIZED FOR UNREALISTIC ASSUMPTIONS about early earth atmospherical conditions, methodological FLAWS, and LIMITED APPLICABILITY to the actual origin of life. When it comes to the Miller-Urey experiment things continue to go WRONG and its significance for the origin-of-life question is now perceived as an INVALID EXPERIMENT and IRRELEVANT in terms of justifying the origin of life. The scientific CONSENSUS VIEW of early earth’s atmospheric constituents has CHANGED since the 1950s. (4) Question 5: Do all scientists accept Darwin’s theory of evolution at the cellular level? (5) At present, the scientific mainstream accepts evolutionary mechanisms as the BEST-SUPPORTED EXPLANATION for the diversity and complexity of life, while recognizing that IMPORTANT QUESTIONS — especially concerning the origin of life and the detailed evolutionary history of some molecular systems — REMAIN ACTIVE AREAS of investigation. The disagreement is therefore not over whether cells are extraordinarily complex (they are), but over whether known evolutionary mechanisms are SUFFICIENT TO EXPLAIN how that complexity arose. (6) Question 6. Do the changes in finch beaks, or the changes due to selective breeding, prove Darwin’s theory of evolution? (7) Finch beaks changing is only microevolution which all agree is true. Selective breeding is not “environmental natural factors” as required by Darwin’s theory. Darwin’s theory includes macroevolution where species lead to new species. This has never been observed. (8) Question 7. Does the fossil record support Darwin’s theory of evolution? (9) No, Darwin predicted that IF his theory were correct, there should be evidence that simple life forms gradually developed into more and more complex organisms. Paleontologists generally state that the fossil record does NOT SUPPORT Darwin’s theory in 2 major ways: (a) Animal types tend to appear SUDDENLY (as in the Cambrian Explosion) not gradually, as Darwin predicted. Therefore, each animal type is missing its link to its former ancestor. (b) Animals tend to remain UNCHANGED throughout their time on earth (NOT SLOWLY DEVELOPING into new forms as Darwin predicted). This is episode 283.

  8. Jun 29

    False Ideas About Truth - Part 15 - Problems for Darwinian Theory

    References: (1) The first 5 tenets appeared in Darwin’s magnum opus “The Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection” in 1859. The subtitle of which is the “Preservation of Favored Races in the Struggle for Life.” (2) One of the biggest weaknesses in Darwin’s original theory was that he lacked a correct mechanism for heredity. He did not know about genes or DNA. (3) Darwin’s father, considering the 16-year-old a wastrel interested only in game shooting, sent him to study medicine at Edinburgh University in 1825. Later in life, Darwin gave the impression that he had LEARNED LITTLE during his two years at Edinburgh. In fact, it was a FORMATIVE EXPERIENCE. There was no better science education in a British university. He was taught to understand the chemistry of cooling of rocks on the primitive earth and how to classify plants by the modern “natural system.” (4) The young Darwin LEARNED MUCH in Edinburgh’s rich intellectual environment but not MEDICINE: he loathed anatomy and (pre-chloroform) surgery sickened him. The university’s radical students exposed the teenager to the latest Continental sciences. But his father, realizing that the CHURCH was a better calling for an aimless naturalist, switched him to Christ’s College, Cambridge, in 1828. (5) Sometime later Darwin jumped at the suggestion of a voyage to Tierra del Fuego, at the southern tip of South America aboard the HMS Beagle. On December 27, 1831, Charles Darwin left Devonport, England, aboard Her Majesty’s Ship Beagle. As Darwin set sail, he says he was a Bible-believing creationist. In his words recorded in The Life and Letters of Charles Darwin, vol. 1. p. 45, he said, “I did not then in the least DOUBT the strict and literal TRUTH OF EVERY WORD in the Bible. . . .” (6) On the last leg of the voyage Darwin finished his 770-page diary, wrapped up 1,750 pages of notes, drew up 12 catalogs of his 5,436 skins, bones, and carcasses — and yet he still was interested in scientific questions. He wondered, for example: Was each Galapagos mockingbird a naturally produced variety? Why did ground sloths become extinct? He sailed home with PROBLEMS ENOUGH TO LAST HIM A LIFETIME. When he landed in October 1836, his interest in being a vicar had faded, the gun had given way to the notebook, and the supreme theorizer — who would always move from small causes to big outcomes — had the courage to LOOK BEYOND the conventions of his own Victorian culture for NEW ANSWERS. (7) With his voyage over and with a 400 pounds annual allowance from his father, Darwin now settled down among the urban gentry as a geologist. He was making adult decisions about his life and was looking beyond the present to his lifetime work. (8) With a 1,000 pound Treasury grant, obtained through the Cambridge (https://www.britannica.com/place/Cambridge-England) network, he employed the best experts and published their descriptions of his specimens in his Zoology of the Voyage of H.M.S. Beagle (1838–43). Darwin’s star had risen, and he was now lionized in London. (9) Darwin formulated his bold theory of evolution in private in 1837–39, after returning from the voyage around the world. But it was not until two decades later that he finally gave it full public expression in the 1859 book “On the Origin of Species,” a book that has deeply influenced modern Western society and thought. (10) Michael Ruse also said that evolution is a RELIGION and that Richard Dawkins  and his New Atheists friends’ “treatment of the religious viewpoint is PATHETIC to the point of non-being. Richard Dawkins in “The God Delusion” would FAIL any introductory philosophy or religion course. Proudly he criticizes that whereof he knows nothing.” [I think Dawkins may have failed any introductory logic course as well.] (11) Allow me to answer questions commonly posed concerning evolution. Question 1: Is Darwin’s theory of evolution a fact? No, I think not. It has not been PROVEN and cannot be REPLICATED in a laboratory and some claims would have happened millions of years ago. It has gone through many changes over the years since 1859 to conform to the evidence, and many scientific issues still remain. (12) Question 2: Is there any PROOF that evolution happened? That depends on what you mean by “evolution.” If you mean evolution is “change over time,” then you see it all the time. People are born, grow, age, and die. (13) There are 4 common ways evolution is used: microevolution, macroevolution, Universal Common Descent, and Natural selection (or survival of the fittest.) (14) I am unashamedly critiquing evolution and pointing out some of its flaws. The STRANGLEHOLD of evolution’s  capture of public thought is PROFOUND, and is a BARRIER to the Gospel for millions of people. Once people understand the SCIENTIFIC WEAKNESSES of evolution and how it UNDERMINES the Gospel, it need not be as big a JUGGERNAUT it MASQUERADES as. (15) Question 3: Is the Big Bang good news or bad news for Darwin’s theory of evolution? In my opinion, it’s BAD NEWS. Why? Darwin’s theory requires extremely long periods of time to produce the necessary changes in living forms. However, the Big Bang theory says there was a beginning of the universe now reckoned to be about 13.7 billion years ago. That does not provide enough time to support Darwin’s theory of evolution. According to most calculations, a universe of 100 billion years is NOT OLD ENOUGH for the development of a single cell. The Big Bang theory is consistent with the biblical account of Genesis which affirms that God created the world ex nihilo, out of nothing. Some thinkers dislike the Big Bang theory because it appears to be like biblical creation. This is episode 282.

See All (288)

Ratings & Reviews

3.3
out of 5
7 Ratings

About

Dr. Joe Mott earned his PhD at LSU, and was a distinguished math professor at Florida State University for 38 years years, helping to write 3 math textbooks, and authoring over 30 research articles in math.

Information