We’re Defeated by Evolution’s Biggest Problems

Today we found a brilliant post at the creationist blog of the Discovery Institute. It’s titled Biologist Jonathan Wells Gives “Top Scientific Problems with Evolution”, and it doesn’t have an author’s by-line. Here are some excerpts, with bold font added by us for emphasis, and occasional Curmudgeonly interjections that look [like this]:

A new ID the Future episode [Ooooooooooooh! A Discoveroid podcast!] spotlights a new book, The Comprehensive Guide to Science and Faith: Exploring the Ultimate Questions about Life and the Cosmos [Amazon link], and specifically a chapter by biologist Jonathan Wells titled “What are the Top Scientific Problems with Evolution?”

Wowie — evolution’s top problems! This is exciting! Most of our regular readers know who Wells is. If you need a refresher, see Discovery Institute: The Genius of Jonathan Wells. The Discoveroid post then says:

Wells is the guest, and the host is geologist and Center for Science and Culture associate director Casey Luskin [Hee hee!], who co-edited the anthology from Harvest House. Download the podcast or listen to it here. [Link omitted!]

Verily, a dynamic duo! After that introduction, the Discoveroids tell us:

In this episode the first problem that Wells highlights concerns homology and convergence. [Whoopee!] A second problem involves fossils. Darwin anticipated “innumerable transitions” in the fossil record, but such a rainbow of transitional forms has never been found. [Gasp!] Not even close.

Egad — there are no transitional fossils! At least that’s what we hear from creationists. Casey has been making that claim for years — see Discovery Institute: Transitional Fossils? No Way! Whenever creationists make that claim, we just link to Wikipedia’s ever-growing List of transitional fossils. Okay, the Discoveroid post continues:

Another problem, molecular phylogenies.[What?] Another: the lack of observational evidence that natural selection can help to accumulate many small changes into major new innovations.

BWAHAHAHAHAHA! Once again, the Discoveroids are dancing the micro-macro mambo — described in Common Creationist Claims Confuted. Let’s read on:

What about the power of random mutations, with or without natural selection? Wells says that this, too, is a problem for modern evolutionary theory, and he provides laboratory evidence to support his claim.

Ooooooooooooh! Laboratory evidence that mutations don’t do anything. That’s amazing! Here’s another excerpt:

Another problem: evidence pouring in from what are known as molecular phylogenies.

Pouring in? Well, whatcha gonna do? Oh, Wikipedia has an article on Molecular phylogenetics. Strange, they don’t say that Darwinism is doomed. Anyway, here’s the end of the Discoveroids’ post:

As Luskin notes, there is much more in the essay, and it’s only one of many essays in the new anthology, with contributions from many of the leading lights of the intelligent design movement. [Impressive!] Each essay is written in a concise and accessible form.

Okay, dear reader. It appears that the Discoveroids are finally demolishing Darwin’s theory, and now we all look like fools! There’s no way to deny it — the Designer does what he does because that’s what he does! You can’t argue with that, can you?

Copyright © 2021. The Sensuous Curmudgeon. All rights reserved.

12 responses to “We’re Defeated by Evolution’s Biggest Problems

  1. And yet ….
    No one has an alternative to evolution.

  2. Just what we needed more essays. Talk is cheap.

  3. Regurgitating that old warhorse ‘lack of transitional fossils’ – in the year 2021 – tells you how desperate these people really are.

  4. chris schilling

    Top 10 problems with the Discoveroids:

    1) They haven’t got a theory
    2) They don’t understand descent with modification
    3) Inability to recognise a transitional fossil if it bit ’em in the ass (see 2, above)
    4) Still no theory
    5) Infected with born-agains (Meyer); Jews for Jesus (Casey L.) and not-Jews for Jesus (Klinghoffer); ex-Moonies; and other disreputable types
    6) Get upset easily over ad hom
    7) “There’s no theory here. Here, there’s no theory. Alright? Theory, no. Robbo?” (See Aussie crime drama ‘Chopper’ for obscure, parochial reference)
    8) Can’t afford a new green screen
    9) Pretend a belief in the supernatural doesn’t somehow equate to a belief in magic
    10) Keep publishing books on non-existent theory no-one in their right mind wants to read

  5. Dave Luckett

    chris, you forgot “telling lies”, and worse, “getting caught at it”.

  6. I like Jerry Coyne’s description of Jonathon Wells: a scientifically rejected charlatan.

    Say no more.

  7. @Tedinoz
    Coyne says that Intelligent Design has been rejected because there is no evidence for it.
    I beg to differ.
    Intelligent Design has been rejected because there is no substance to it. There is no there, there. As was pointed out by Herbert Spencer in his 1852 essay, “The Development Hyothesis” in Wikisource.org.

  8. @Chris Schilling, Do you have a link for your claim that Casey Luskin is Jews-for-Jesus? And does anyone know Wells’s argument that molecular phylogeny challenges evolution? I would have thought that it was the most convincing possible confirmation

  9. chris schilling

    @Paul
    Try this link: http://www.caseyluskin.com/
    From the ABOUT section: “Casey is a Christian with a Jewish background.”

    The tag “Jew for Jesus” may be more mine than Casey’s. I can’t say if he identifies officially as such with that particular group. I may have exaggerated for comic effect, and to set up the (dubious) gag about resorting to ad hom.

  10. “Jews for Jesus” is a very specific sect: sample here – https://jewsforjesus.org/answers/why-did-jesus-need-to-die-for-our-sins We can accuse Casey of many things, but not of this particular meshuga’as

  11. Darwin anticipated “innumerable transitions” in the fossil record

    Maybe Jesus is hiding them. If the Devil puts fossils in the ground then Jesus would do the opposite of the Devil and take fossils out of the ground. (Because Jesus is the diametrical opposite of the Devil.)

  12. I thought that fossils in the ground were the result of Noah’s Flood.