"The Darwinian theory of descent has not a single fact
to confirm it in the realm of nature. It is not the result of scientific
research, but purely the product of imagination."
Albert Fleischmann. Witnesses Against Evolution by
John Fred Meldau (Denver: Christian Victory Publishing, 1968), p. 13.
“[T]he theory suffers
from grave defects, which are becoming more and more apparent as time
advances. It can no longer square with practical scientific knowledge, nor
does it suffice for our theoretical grasp of the facts…No one can
demonstrate that the limits of a species have ever been passed. These are
the Rubicons which evolutionists cannot cross…Darwin ransacked other
spheres of practical research work for ideas…But his whole resulting
scheme remains, to this day, foreign to scientifically established
zoology, since actual changes of species by such means are still unknown.”
Albert Fleischmann, "The Doctrine of Organic
Evolution in the Light of Modern Research," Journal of the Transactions of
the Victoria Institute 65 (1933): pp. 194-95, 205-6, 208-9.
“Evolutionism is a
fairy tale for grown-ups. This theory has helped nothing in the progress
of science. It is useless.” Louis Bounoure. The Advocate, 8 March
1984, p. 17.
“And the salient fact
is this: if by evolution we mean macroevolution (as we henceforth shall),
then it can be said with the utmost rigor that the doctrine is totally
bereft of scientific sanction. Now, to be sure, given the multitude of
extravagant claims about evolution promulgated by evolutionists with an
air of scientific infallibility, this may indeed sound strange. And yet
the fact remains that there exists to this day not a shred of bona fide
scientific evidence in support of the thesis that macroevolutionary
transformations have ever occurred.”
Wolfgang Smith, Teilhardism and the New Religion
(Rockford., Ill.: Tan Books, 1988), pp. 5-6. Dr. Smith, taught at MIT and
"With the failure of these many efforts,
science was left in the somewhat embarrassing position of having to
postulate theories of living origins which it could not demonstrate. After
having chided the theologian for his reliance on myth and miracle, science
found itself in the inevitable position of having to create a mythology of
its own: namely, the assumption that what, after long effort could not
prove to take place today had, in truth, taken place in the primeval
past." Loren Eisley, The Immense Journey (1957), p. 199.
"If complex organisms ever did evolve
from simpler ones, the process took place contrary to the laws of nature,
and must have involved what may rightly be termed the miraculous." R.E.D.
Clark, Victoria Institute (1943), p.
" `Creation,' in the ordinary sense of
the word, is perfectly conceivable. I find no difficulty in conceiving
that, at some former period, this universe was not in existence, and that
it made its appearance in six days (or instantaneously, if that is
preferred), in consequence of the volition of some preexisting Being.
Then, as now, the so-called a priori arguments against Theism and, given a
Deity, against the possibility of creative acts, appeared to me to be
devoid of reasonable foundation." Thomas H. Huxley, quoted in *L.
Huxley, Life and Letters of Thomas Henry Huxley, Vol. I (1903), p. 241
"Our theory of evolution has become . .
one which cannot be refuted by any possible observations. Every
conceivable observation can be fitted into it . . No one can think of ways
in which to test it. Ideas wither without basis or based on a few
laboratory experiments carried out in extremely simplified systems, have
attained currency far beyond their validity. They have become part of an
evolutionary dogma accepted by most of us as part of our training."
L.C. Birch and *P. Ehrlich, Nature, April 22, 1967.
"What is at stake is not the validity of
the Darwinian theory itself, but of the approach to science that it has
come to represent. The peculiar form of consensus the theory wields has
produced a premature closure of inquiry in several branches of biology,
and even if this is to be expected in `normal science,' such a dogmatic
approach does not appear healthy." R. Brady, "Dogma and Doubt,"
Biological Journal of the Linnean Society, 17:79, 96 (1982)
Evolution Books and Videos