Tuesday, April 24, 2007
A Dispassionate Weighing of the Relevant Evidence
John Marshall, a professor of medicine at the University of Missouri -- Columbia, has doubts about Darwinism. Did his new found skepticism emerge following a dispassionate review of the evidence? No, those doubts crept in after his conversion to Christianity.
Suddenly, as Marshall tells it, he found it hard to "reconcile evolutionary theory with Genesis, the biblical account of how God created the earth and everything on it in six days."
Well, duh.
Following his conversion it became apparent to Marshall that there are gaps, holes, missing pieces in -- no, not Genesis -- Darwin's theory of evolution. He became a proponent of intelligent design, the view that there are some natural systems that cannot be adequately explained by natural forces, and therefore must be the result of ID," according to The Columbia Missourian.
And, although the number of intelligent design activists who are not biblical literalists is roughly equivalent to the number of politicians in heaven, Marshall assures us "that belief in intelligent design does not necessarily require adherence to a religious doctrine."
Suddenly, as Marshall tells it, he found it hard to "reconcile evolutionary theory with Genesis, the biblical account of how God created the earth and everything on it in six days."
Well, duh.
Following his conversion it became apparent to Marshall that there are gaps, holes, missing pieces in -- no, not Genesis -- Darwin's theory of evolution. He became a proponent of intelligent design, the view that there are some natural systems that cannot be adequately explained by natural forces, and therefore must be the result of ID," according to The Columbia Missourian.
And, although the number of intelligent design activists who are not biblical literalists is roughly equivalent to the number of politicians in heaven, Marshall assures us "that belief in intelligent design does not necessarily require adherence to a religious doctrine."
