Sunday, September 21, 2008

Is Evolution Pseudoscience?

I'm dealing with a frustrating situation at work right now and it has been taxing my energy. So there haven't been many posts.. but here's something you all find neat.

Is Evolution Pseudoscience? You've heard it all before... Creationism is just pseudoscience... I'd disagree, but that's neither here nor there. What about Evolution? How does it stand up to the same attacks that are posed against some people's ideas of what Creationism might be? CMI has given us just a glimpse.
The Skeptic’s Dictionary contains an entry on ‘pseudoscience’ that includes ten characteristic fallacies of pseudoscientific theories. The list’s compiler clearly did not have evolution in mind, as the very first group the article identifies as pseudoscientific is ‘creationists’. Ironically, evolution has almost every characteristic on this list.
Read the whole article at CMI.


Jonathan Perreault said...


From what I've heard, science must be observable and repeatable. That's why evolution is not a law, like the second law of thermodynamics. Evolution is a scientific theory.

Incidentally, my family and I were recently talking with a highly educated evolutionist. This evolutionist asked each of us to give her one reason why we didn't believe in evolution. My mom said she didn't believe in evolution because it is contrary to the second law of thermodynamics, which says that everything is going from a state of order to disorder, not vise-versa as evolution teaches. When my mom said that, the evolutionist had to agree!


Only Look said...

Man it should not even be in the same sentence with science.

Jan said...

It is truly amazing how the carnal mind can rewrite reality to suit itself. Just as creationism is a tenet of our faith, so evolution is a tenet of the humanism/atheism faith.

One of the things about evolution that always tickles my funny bone is how they cannot get away from the concept of intelligence and will when describing evolution. "Evolution intended..." "Evolution designed...."
"The evolutionary intent...."


Kevl said...

Here's a neat article about the way people make up their minds about something.

On the surface it may not seem to relate to the topic but I'm sure you'll each agree that it does relate.

JP there is a counter argument to the 2nd Law of Thermal Dynamics that talks about a reversible system - basically a system with controls in it such as Evolution - which can't accurately be described by the 2nd Law.

I'm reaching way way way back into my brain here so I no doubt have some of the details incorrect.

The Evolutionists seemingly always have a counter to every argument against Evolution. Often it is in the counter arguments that the true failings of the theory are exposed.

If I remember correctly the argument that the 2nd Law doesn't apply to the overall biosphere was severely compromised by circular logic.. but I can't be sure. It's been a long time since I looked into it.


David Wyatt said...


I still like what Dr. W.A. Criswell once said about pseudo science such as evolution. He said a woman was having trouble sleeping, so she went to her doctor who told her to eat something before going to bed. Incredulous, she said, "But doctor, just last week you told me that I should NOT eat anything befoer going to bed!" He replied to her , "tut tut madam! Science has made great strides in this last week!" Just so, evolution, though there is nothing in it that agrees with true science, which is simply man's observation of the world around him, still pretends to be the real thing.