Originally created 01/03/01

Evolution denies 'law of science'

Two letters recently published in the Augusta Chronicle parrot the mantra of evolutionism: Evolution is a fact and everyone who believes in creation is stupid.

Mr. Gelbart, Dec. 18, writes: "Believing in creationism is equivalent to getting one's news from the National Enquirer." I would simply point out that anyone who believes what he writes is no rocket scientist: "Every time a man and woman make a baby evolution has occurred..." and "Scientists have even observed new species of animals evolving in the wild."

Mr. Baxter, Dec. 19, writes: "As a scientist, I am familiar with the creationist pseudo scientists, Morris, Gish,.." One of these pseudo scientists, Dr. Henry Morris (PhD, University of Minnesota), served on five university faculties, was head of the Civil Engineering Department at Virginia Polytechnic Institute for 13 years, and established the Institute for Creation Research. As a former teacher at VPI I knew Dr. Morris; Richard Baxter is no Henry Morris.

Mr. Baxter claims evolution violates no law of physics. As a scientist Mr. Baxter should know the concept of evolution directly contradicts the Second Law of Thermodynamics, called the "premier law of science" by Albert Einstein. This law states that there is an inexorable tendency of all processes toward decay and disorder; evolution required the reverse.

Dr. Wernher von Braun, father of the space program, in a 1972 letter to the California Board of Education, clearly refutes the ideas promulgated by Mr. Gelbart and Mr. Baxter:

"While the admission of a design of the universe ultimately raises the question of a designer (a subject outside of science), the scientific method does not allow us to exclude data which lead to the conclusion that the universe, life and man are based on design. To be forced to believe only one conclusion - that everything in the universe happened by chance - would violate the very objectivity of science itself. Certainly there are those who argue that the universe evolved out of a random process, but what random process could produce the brain of a man or the system of the human eye."

Hubert Baker, Aiken


Trending this week:


© 2017. All Rights Reserved.    | Contact Us