Identity Verified Thinker in Science / Social Sciences / Sociology
Mike Sutton
Mike Sutton
Dr Mike Sutton is the author of 'Nullius in Verba: Darwin's greatest secret'.
Posted in Science / Social Sciences / Sociology

Why are Darwinists allowed to teach deluded belief in supernatural miracles in our schools and universities?

Mar. 9, 2015 3:43 am

Trumpet from the rooftopsPublic Domain

Darwinist atheists share the same beliefs in immaculate virgin conceptions as Christians and they impose them on the history of scientific discovery

The New Data (Sutton 2014) changes everything we recently thought we knew about the discovery of natural selection. The old Darwinist story that their namesake and Alfred Wallace each discovered it interdependently of Patrick Matthew's (1831) prior publication is disconfirmed by the discovery that major naturalists they knew, corresponded with and met, who played key roles influencing them and facilitating their publications, had read and cited Matthew in the literature before they put pen to paper on the very same groundbreaking topic (e.g. Robert Chambers and Prideaux John Selby). Selby edited Wallace's Sarawak paper and Chambers published the best-selling 'Vestiges of Creation' - which put evolution in the air in the first half of the 19th century and - as both Darwin and Wallace admitted - profoundly influenced them and society in general on the question of the origin of species. Moreover, the old Darwinist "immaculate conception" myth is further disconfirmed by the New Data, because that data reveals others, who influenced and facilitated Darwin's and Wallace's influencers (e.g. John Loudon and David Low). Loudon edited Blyth's two hugely influential articles on varieties and species and Low, who was first to replicate Matthew's artificial selection analogy to explain selection by law of nature, was read by Darwin and recommended to the Royal Society for his work on that precise topic. Most importantly, everything described in this paragraph happened years before Darwin and Wallace had their papers so famously read before the Linnean Society in 1858.

Darwinists embarrass themselves with their unjust and irrational hypocrisy

In light of the New Data, in the final analysis, Christians and Darwinist atheists, such as Richard Dawkins of The Church of the Immaculate Conception of a Prior-Published Theory, actually share the need for a leap of faith in miracles.

At the most basic level, a miracle is defined as such on the basis of its improbability. The Virgin Mary's conception of Jesus of Nazareth being fathered by a supernatural deity, whilst surrounded by fertile humans, is one example of Christian miracle belief. The Darwinist belief in Darwin's and Wallace's independent immaculate virgin-brain cognitive conceptions of a prior published theory, whilst influenced and surrounded by men who had read it, is an example of Darwinist miracle belief (see more on the topic here in my position paper on the New Data).

Perhaps these hypocritically irrational Darwinists do not really love rationality, logic and science at all. Is it Darwin they really love? Is Darwin a proxy God for atheists?

Darwinists have for over 155 years credulously deified Darwin, at the expense of the reputation of science. So doing, the New Data represents Dawkinite. This meme is the equivalent of Kryptonite for all those Darwinist atheists, led by Richard Dawkins, who hypocritically blame religions for imposing their superstitions on the rest of the world.


Disseminate only with credulous belief in himPublic Domain

Darwin is the proxy-god of his atheist Darwinists

Personally, I don't care what nonsense Darwinists such as Dawkins wish to believe about the discovery of natural selection, but I do object to them imposing their irrational beliefs in quasi-supernatural phenomena of improbable virgin cognitive conception on the history of scientific discovery. Why should they be allowed such special privileges, when they so loudly object to religions having them?

If there is an intelligent designer God (and, as an atheist, of that I am extremely far from certain), and if it is a supremely intelligent being, who wishes us all to learn from our mistakes, then it is working in mysterious ways through the world's leading atheist Richard Dawkins and all of Darwin's Darwinists; its wonders to perform. Logically, that would make me its atheist apostle. Now that is "fundamentally" funny - in my opinion.


Mike SuttonPublic Domain

Dr Mike Sutton

The above text is taken from my position paper on the New Data {here} about who we now know really did read Patrick Matthew's prior published hypothesis of natural selection.

I am an atheist because I demand a claim to fact should be supported with confirmatory evidence that rationally outweighs the disconfirming evidence.

In the case that Darwinists make for asking us to believe in Darwin's and Wallace's so-called "independent discoveries" of Matthew's prior-published hypothesis of natural selection, the New Data provides us with evidence for knowledge contamination of Matthew's original ideas into the brains of Darwin and Wallace that rationally outweighs Darwinist beliefs that it never happened.

Follow Patrick Matthew as the Seer of Gourdie Hill on Twitter.


Religious Tolerance.OrgAttribution

I am an atheist because I demand a claim to fact should be supported with confirmatory evidence that rationally outweighs the disconfirming evidence

There are currently no comments.
Latest Ebooks