News Letters

Wednesday 27 August 2014

Evolution is preposterous

Published 07/07/2007 | 00:00

  • Share

Mr Lundbergh is absolutely accurate in his critique of the false pseudo-scientific religion of Darwinism.

  • Share
  • Go To

The hysterical/irrational reaction of its adherents is similar in many ways to the reaction to Pope Benedict's brilliant Regensburg lecture.

Such people do not like to have their certainties questioned.

For anyone with an open mind, neither historical evidence nor scientific experimentation lend any credibility to this "theory". It remains just that, a preposterous theory, not a matter of fact.
It's very much a case of ideology masquerading as science, a crutch for closed minds, an ideology for the deluded.

There's nothing concrete or tangible about it. The contrast with the contribution of its adherents' great ideological enemy (Roman Catholicism) could not be greater. There you have tangible evidence of its reality. For example you can visit the great universities, Oxford, Cambridge, Bologna etc. You can see the Sistine Chapel. You can expand your mind by absorbing the genius of Thomas Aquinas and so on, and so on.

Bad "scientific" ideas (like all bad ideas) have bad consequences.
ERIC CONWAY,
NAVAN, CO MEATH
* Redmond O'Hanlon writes that adherents of evolution rely on "a biased interpretation" (Letters, July 28).

This could not be futher from the truth. One of the main reasons so many books by atheist writers have appeared recently is because of the "intelligent design" concept in the USA.

Over the last few years hundreds of millions of dollars have been spent in an attempt by scientists to find evidence for God's handy work in the natural world. They have even tried (unsuccessfully) to have intelligent design inserted into school science courses on the basis that both arguments deserve equall respect, even though Darwinian evolution has literally mountains of ancient evidence to back it up, and intelligent design has no evidence at all, only theory based on parts of evolution which have not been fully explained by conventional science, yet.

If people such as Mr O'Hanlon can't reconcile evolution with the existence of God, then this is as good as proof that God dosen't exist, in the same way we know the earth is not flat because we know its true shape.
Proof is always positive which is why nobody can ever find evidence for the non-existence of God.
CIARAN FARRELL,
BRAY, CO WICKLOW

Read More

Don't Miss

Editor's Choice