Who Would've Thunk It?
A review of "What Darwin Got Wrong" by Jerry Fodor and Massimo Piattelli-Palmarini.
Here we have a couple of atheists who refuse to fall down on their knees and worship natural selection as if it were a god.
I don't know what to make of this book.
Here's the philosophical outline of the Theory of Evolution.
1. Random Mutations have been observed happening for real in Nature.
2. Natural Selection has been observed and also happens for real in Nature.
3. Random Mutations and Natural Selection working together have designed, programmed, engineered, and created all of the life forms on this planet. This is an observed fact. It's the only scientific explanation for the origin of life which we have.
Since the mutation/selection process can design and create anything, the Theory of Evolution must be true.
In other words, the Theory of Evolution IS the mutation/selection process; and, the mutation/selection process proves that the Theory of Evolution is true.
Now, what do we observe from these atheists?
In their book, they PROVE that natural selection could NOT have designed and created anything. That's all fine and well, because it is Common Sense that Random Chance and Natural Selection cannot design, program, engineer, or create anything at ALL! Mutation and Selection have NO intelligence, hands, eyes, or mind; therefore, mutation and selection cannot design and create anything. It's logical.
In this book, these atheists kill dead two or three of the premises showing that mutation/selection couldn't have done the job that was ascribed to it by the Darwinists and Evolutionists. If all the Premises are FALSE or if even one of the premises is FALSE, then the Theory of Evolution is FALSE. That is logical sense.
However, then these atheists turn around and try to say something to the effect that the Theory of Evolution is true, and the Theory of Evolution has to be true, because we ALL know that God does not exist. Since God does not exist, the only thing that could have created all of the life forms on this planet is Evolution.
It's a classic NON SEQUITUR, and a fatal logic flaw; and, one of the authors is supposed to be a philosopher.
Many people love how these atheists tear apart and dismantle natural selection and explain why it is FALSE because it can't do what the Darwinists say that it did. But then, these very same atheists provide a Non Sequitur conclusion that does NOT match with any of the premises. They take a leap of faith.
Once again, we find atheists (and Darwinists) using logic fallacies in order to make their case for the theory of evolution.
Anyway, I have spent more time discussing and writing about the Theory of Evolution than I wanted to. But, I felt the desire to respond to this particular book.
QUOTE FROM STEPHEN JAY GOULD:
"The extreme rarity of transitional forms in the fossil record persist as the trade secret of paleontology. The evolutionary trees that adorn our textbooks have data only at the tips and nodes of their branches; the rest is inference, however reasonable, not the evidence of fossils. Yet Darwin was so wedded to gradualism that he wagered his entire theory on a denial of this literal record. Darwin's argument still persists as the favored escape of most paleontologists from the embarrassment of a record that seems to show so little of evolution. In exposing its cultural and methodological roots, I wish in no way to impugn the potential validity of gradualism. I only wish to point out that it is never "seen" in the rocks. Paleontologists have paid an exorbitant price for Darwin's argument. We fancy ourselves as the only true students of life's history, yet to preserve our favored account of evolution by natural selection we view our data as so bad that we never see the very process we profess to study." - Stephen J. Gould - "Evolution's Erratic Pace," Natural History, vol. 86 (May 1987), p. 14.
The paleontologists NEVER see any signs of evolution in the rocks -- only in the evolutionary trees that adorn our biology textbooks. The paleontologists who are honest about this subject tell us that Darwin's Tree of Life is based exclusively on faulty assumptions. In other words, the evolutionary trees are fabricated hoaxes that don't match with reality or the fossil record. Darwin's Tree of Life is the greatest hoax ever perpetrated against mankind. Millions have fallen for it -- hook, line, and sinker. The ONLY sign of evolution on the whole face of this planet is found in the man-made evolutionary trees which adorn our textbooks! What good does it do a person to memorize Darwin's Tree of Life if the whole thing is nothing more than a man-made fabricated hoax and lie, which doesn't match with the fossil record?
Once I realized that the fossil record as a whole combined with the observation of Punctuated Equilibrium in the fossil record PROVES beyond all reasonable doubt that NO goo-to-you evolution or NO molecules-to man evolution EVER took place on this planet, then that was all that I ever really needed to know about the fossil record. I saw the facts and the truth of the situation; therefore, once I saw and understood that there are NO signs of evolution in the rocks as Stephen Jay Gould implied, I felt like I knew everything that I really NEEDED to know about the fossil record.
I'm a BIG PICTURE type of guy, and I often go straight to the SUMMARY. In this particular case, all I really needed to discover and know is that evolution of any kind cannot design, program, engineer, build, implement, or create ANYTHING. What more does a person really need to know, when it comes to the Theory of Evolution and the various Darwinian claims?
Now, judge for yourself if the conclusion follows from the premises in the following mini-proof:
Since Evolution could NEVER have done any of the things that the Darwinists say that it did and since Evolution could NEVER have designed and created ANY of the life forms on this planet, God MUST of necessity exist in order to do all of the different things that Evolution could NEVER have done. That's logical common sense.