This letter was posted to Starmag, Dated 15th of February, 2009
and below it would be my response(s).
I WAS very much intrigued by the article Celebrating a revolutionary by Richard Ingham (People, StarMag, Feb 8). Charles Darwin who was a seminary drop-out with absolutely no science degrees or any scientific authority at all, is exalted to the same status as Isaac Newton, Albert Einstein, and Galileo.
Many eminent scientists say because of Darwin, many groundbreaking discoveries were made in the realm of science. A mere “theory” has evolved and made its way into today’s science books as the absolute answer to the origin of man.
On the contrary, what was regarded as the truth since the beginning involving the master designer and creator of life is now considered a religious belief and therefore not scientific.
As a believer of creation science, I reckon that Darwin’s theory is more of a fairytale than science. Darwin’s theory is no different from the fairytale of a frog that became a prince when kissed by a princess except for the added ingredientof “millions and millions of years”.
The “origin of species” requiring billions of years to support the plausibility of life’s emergence and of subsequent evolution from “amoeba” to man is considered science today!
Before I open the Darwin can of worms, let me make clear that creationists are not a bunch of religious evangelists who know nothing about science.
Many Nobel Prize winners in science and scientists from renowned universities such as Oxford, Cambridge, Harvard, and Yale are great writers and contributors to creation science. Browse the following website to discover great creation scientists who have made significant contributions to science: http://www.creationinfo.com/list.htm.
Three major religions of the world believe that man is God’s work. Christianity, Islam and Judaism believe this awesome truth, that man was uniquely created and did not come into existence by chance or evolve from an ape.
Darwin’s theory advocates that out of nothingness came matter and life, which evolved from the most primitive single cell organism to a supreme being like the human. It advocates that billions of things are supposed to have developed upward, becoming more orderly and complex.
This totally contradicts the Second Law of Thermodynamics, where it’s partially a universal law of decay; the prime cause of why everything ultimately falls apart and disintegrates over time, and so does life.
Darwin went outright against the Bible, the Quran, and the Torah in presenting his theory and thus creating a religion called Evolution, luring many “weak links” into believing his folly.
Daniel Vijayaruban Samuel,
This is based on my limited knowledge on the subject.
I take special objection to the letter by Daniel Vijayaruban Samuel (Starmag 15th February)
He starts by writing off the credentials of Darwin, a lowly tactic used by many pro-creationists(As should be known, Darwin studied at a clergy. He was brought up with Christianity. That creationism was drilled into him from the start and he by his own initiative, found proof to refute all he had believed to be true means a lot) after failing to refute evidence of the theory nor able to by any extent, prove their own.
Indeed, after providing facts, figures and scientific quantifiable methods to prove Darwin’s point- for example the Carbon Dating method that predicts the age of the earth to be about 4.5 billion years old. The pro-creationists simply wave it off as “there may be possible mistakes in carbon dating”, citing the biblical flood as a cause of discrepancy.
When asked for a semblance of proof for creationism, no scientifically measurable methods are forthcoming leaving Creationism to be just a belief, a theory.
With the discovery of DNA, so much has been explained. Human DNA is also found to be 96% similar with many apes and 99 per cent similar with chimpanzees. Man have been found to have originated from the continent of Africa and branched out from there settling all across the globe. Proof that man evolved from another species can be found in the discovery of Homo erectus, Homo habilis and Australopithecus africanus.
In contrast, how does the bible explain away the tens of thousands of prehistoric fossils if the earth were only 6500 years old? Unless you subscribe to the lie that the fossils are nothing more than plaster of paris, made up by artists to beguile the faithful.
A side question here, following the discovery of human migration trails above, were Adam and Eve Black? To swerve away from responding to the question by questioning the accuracy of it would once again prove that pro-creationists have used the same outdated ammunition ever since 1857 over and over again- to brush off all new and fresh efforts made by the scientific community while having nothing new of their own. To agree with that statement would start a whole new debacle.
Starmag’s allocation of 3 pages for the issue is sorely inadequate yet in keeping with the limitations of a newspaper I will have to keep my respond brief.
Finally, a bid to all pro-creationists out there, it is time to come up with proof for your theories instead of doing nothing but undermine the efforts of real scientists! Till then, I’m a monkey’s uncle.
Pseudonym: Medical student
Yong Kuan Yew
My other article in support of evolution