The Dogma Of Deceit
ORIGIN SCIENCE ASSOCIATION
The Dogma of Deceit
Part Two
Then the Lord God formed man of dust from the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living being.”
Genesis 2:7
“…natural selection is incompetent to account for the incipient stages of useful structures…” Charles Darwin The Origin of Species, 6th Ed.
Baptiste de Lamarck that Darwin owes the greater part of thanks. Lamarck, botanist and zoologist at the Jardin des Plantes, a famous natural history museum in Paris, was the first naturalist of his day to abandon the biblical concept of fixed species.
Lamarck’s theory was the
first complete conceptualization of evolution, but it is because of his doctrine of acquired characteristics that he is remembered today. This doctrine suggests that if your parents had exercised habitually you would inherit large muscles, or that moles lost their eyes because they did not need them in their dark tunnels.
That is it is the desire for the use or disuse of bodily parts by man or animal which brings about modifications to these parts. It is to his credit that Darwin initially rejected Lamarckism, but by the sixth edition of his book he used it to circumvent the lack of evidence and grave theoretical complications which plagued the theory of evolution.
And yet, if Darwin’s book had not become so immediately popular it is doubtful that we would remember him as a geneticist. Like so many of his contemporaries he believed in a Lamarckian like concept of a blending inheritance because the theory of evolution by natural selection depended so much upon the inheritance of characteristics.
Darwin’s search for proof to bolster The Origin of Species was in his theory of Pangenesis. According to this theory each part of the body produced pangenes (gemmules) which were found in the blood and distributed about the body by the blood. Reproductive cells then carried these traits (from various parts of the parent’s body) to the offspring; thus the child acquired characteristics of the parent. It is clear that the ideological search for proof by Darwin had little to do with the scientific method and that he was more a philosopher on the nature of origins than a scientist seeking out the truth.
The elevation of natural selection to the god of nature by Darwin was a natural result of an atheistic bias against a Creator. The history of this bias and the development of a purely naturalistic interpretation of God’s creative powers pre-dates the publication of The Origin of Species by thousands of years. Man has from the fall searched for a way around allegiance to the creator for if there were no God, if the world and all of nature arose by chance, if all of life and breath were derived from the formula: “Chemistry + Time + Energy + Chance + Natural Selection = Man,” then there is no God. It is in the search for an excuse not to believe that the barren theory of Evolution was developed.