Darwinism rebutted in letters pages

A couple of letters pages entries which stand out recently. Darwinists will often insist that their pet ideology is "established fact" or "important to medicine". Not according to William E Smiddy MD writing in the medical journal Archives of Opthalmology:

However, lost in the platitudes is the fact that evolution is still but a theory, not an experimentally verifiable fact. There is no more than B:III evidence for the theory of evolution (ie, there have been no clinical trials, randomized or not, confirming the theory; rather, respected authorities have concluded its parts and, at best, there are case-control series that have been extrapolated to its conclusion) despite pervasive, frequent, and dogmatic proclamations to the contrary.

That evolution has not been subjected to randomized clinical trials is an inescapable fact and one which is not mentioned often enough. Thankyou for reminding us of this, Dr Smiddy.

In the Daily American, the key planks of the darwinist argument are neatly taken apart by Wendell McLaughlin:

Evolution not fact but theory. In fact there is more science that supports intelligent design. This is why evolutionists fight so hard to keep it from being taught in our schools.
Evolutionists say that evolution is based on science and intelligent design is based on faith, but both require faith in something. Neither can positively prove the beginning of everything from nothing.
Darwins theory of evolution requires working backward and sometimes ignoring facts that do not support their theory and requires millions of years opposed to the Bibles thousands.
Carbon Dating measures the amount of carbon monoxide in material. Many things can vary these results; if buried or not and in what or exposed to air or sun and for how long, etc. Also you can set the scale from 0 to millions or thousands.
The rotation speed of the earth is slowing, if reversed the centrifugal force would overcome gravity and fling us from the earth well before the time required for evolution. ...
The fossil record does not show any mutation between one animal and another. Evolution science is based on a false premise and therefore bad science, and mathematically impossible. In fact there are many scientists, teachers, and experts in every field that support intelligent design, and not evolution, search - intelligent design.

For all my years of science writing I don't think I could have put it better myself.


Find out why there is an intelligent design controversy!

Find out why there is an intelligent design controversy: