Commentary: Living with the Darwin Fish

From the article:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Why the discovery of yet another 'missing link' doesn't destroy my
faith.

Stan Guthrie | posted 3/12/2007 09:05AM

I've always secretly identified with the apostle Thomas. Upon hearing
eyewitness accounts of the Lord's resurrection, Thomas stubbornly
said, "Unless I see in his hands the mark of the nails, and place my
finger into the mark of the nails, and place my hand into his side, I
will never believe." Doubting Thomas could have been a journalist.

When I became a Christian, I began looking for real-world evidence to
bolster my faith in Christ?whether that evidence came in the form of
threads snipped from the Shroud of Turin or splinters supposedly from
Noah's Ark. I rebelled at the sneering claims of atheistic
evolutionists such as Daniel Dennett and Sam Harris, who assert (with
complete faith) that a proper understanding of physical law leaves no
room for "the God hypothesis." Every science course I ever took
assumed that we evolved from "primordial soup" in a random,
purposeless process. No God required.

What I read in Genesis didn't seem to square with mainstream
scientific theory, so I decided the theory was wrong. After all,
"objective" scientists with naturalistic agendas had fallen for hoaxes
before (just google "Piltdown Man"), and what little fossil evidence
there was seemed skimpy. I wasn't alone in my skepticism. According to
Gallup, approximately half of Americans express serious doubts about
evolution.

Last year, however, came word of Tiktaalik roseae, which looks
discomfitingly like those offensive "Darwin fishes" on the cars of
smug college professors. Giddy evolutionists immediately hailed the
375-million-year-old fossil as a "missing link" between fish and land
animals. "It's a really amazing, remarkable intermediate fossil,"
scientist Neil H. Shubin told The New York Times. "It's like, holy
cow."

So what's a Doubting Thomas to do? First, we need to remember that
scientists have hailed "missing links" before, only to be embarrassed
when further evidence came out. The Discovery Institute, which
supports Intelligent Design, noted that enthusiasm over this latest
find is a backhanded admission by paleontologists that the fossil
record has not been kind to Darwin's theory.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Read it at http://www.christianitytoday.com/ct/2007/march/37.74.html














J. Spaceman

.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Interesting article about DNA evidence (or lack thereof)
    ... scientists have made that claim. ... the evidence for human evolution; ... I guess it depends on what you mean by "faith." ... "The spirit told me Evolution is false!" ...
    (soc.religion.mormon)
  • Re: Which Is More Plausible?
    ... creatures evolve the same way we see an apple fall from a tree. ... Creationism offers nothing in the way of observable evidence. ... We take it on faith that those ... tend to share the same faith in non-locality as scientists. ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: Commentary: Living with the Darwin Fish
    ... Doubting Thomas could have been a journalist. ... I began looking for real-world evidence to ... bolster my faith in Christ-whether that evidence came in the form of ... "objective" scientists with naturalistic agendas had fallen for hoaxes ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: Commentary: Living with the Darwin Fish
    ... Doubting Thomas could have been a journalist. ... I began looking for real-world evidence to ... bolster my faith in Christ-whether that evidence came in the form of ... "objective" scientists with naturalistic agendas had fallen for hoaxes ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: Challenge to evolutionists
    ... your #2 But you have to accept that by one by faith. ... According to science that body was the person, ... it...and the mere existence of the universe is no such evidence. ... (Scientists however do this all the time, ...
    (talk.origins)