Home » Darwinism, Evolution » Paul Johnson in Forbes on Darwinian Fundamentalism

Paul Johnson in Forbes on Darwinian Fundamentalism

Thoughts on the Existence of God
Paul Johnson, 06.20.05, 12:00 AM ET (from the latest Forbes Magazine)

Of all the fundamentalist groups at large in the world today, the Darwinians seem to me the most objectionable. They are just as strident and closed to argument as Christian or Muslim fundamentalists, but unlike those two groups the Darwinians enjoy intellectual respectability.

Darwinians and their allies dominate the scientific establishments of the West. They rule the campus. Their militant brand of atheism makes them natural allies of the philosophical atheists who control most college philosophy faculties. They dominate the leading scientific magazines and prevent their critics and opponents from getting a hearing, and they secure the best slots on TV. Yet the Darwinian brand of evolution is becoming increasingly vulnerable as the progress of science reveals its weaknesses. One day, perhaps soon, it will collapse in ruins. MORE

  • Delicious
  • Facebook
  • Reddit
  • StumbleUpon
  • Twitter
  • RSS Feed

5 Responses to Paul Johnson in Forbes on Darwinian Fundamentalism

  1. Interesting to see this come out on the same day as this.

  2. Most Objectionable

    Christian and Muslim extremism are deeply destructive forces in the world. That’s what they do. Look at Bamiyan, the tip of Manhattan, or Oklahoma City.

    And yet a theory which has created cures for diseases and alleviated suffering, and never harm…

  3. Thoughts from Kansas: do you really mean to imply that Darwinism is responsible for modern day cures? How does Darwinism guide the preponderance of researchers in their everyday scientific projects?

  4. The national academy of sciences defends evolution as if it were a religion. They are so vociferous when comes to doubting the theory. Already, 300 scientists signed a statement of dissent from darwinism, however, the NASC denies that.

  5. “do you really mean to imply that Darwinism is responsible for modern day cures?”

    I certainly think they mean to imply that.

    It kind of begs the question of whether the person saying it is dishonest, stupid, or both. There are no other possible answers.

Leave a Reply