GillsDarwinism Under the Microscope

This book is a collection of essays compiled and commentated on by Dr. James P Gills and Dr. Thomas Woodward, designed to refute modern science's pervasive allegiance to macro evolution. Each essay is very thorough and most are quite technical. A scientific background is helpful with some of the chapters, especially the Complexity of the Cell and the Design of the Vertebrate Retina (although both establish the entire point of the authors without any other argument necessary.)Chapter 5 offers an excellent synopsis of the most relevant evaluations in this ongoing debate. It provides all the major points of the empirical and philosophical critiques of Darwinism in seed form. If you're looking for just the broad overview, this is your chapter!Chapters 6 and 7 proved to be my personal favorites. Chapter six details the Cambrian Explosion and the Rediscovery of the Burgess Shale both as significant obstacles to current macro evolutionary theory.In Chapter seven, Thomas Woodward puts Dr. Michael Behe's book, Darwin's Black Box: The Biochemical Challenge to Evolution, up against Darwin's own words in The Origin of Species. Darwin said,"If it could be demonstrated that any complex organ existed which could not possibly have been formed by numerous, successive, slight modifications, my theory would absolutely break down." The discovery of molecular biology brought the concept of irreducible complexity to the forefront of the evolutionary debate. Woodward summarizes Behe's position as, "modern evolutionary theory, applying Darwin's own test, flunks spectacularly at the molecular level."The book's conclusion brings all of the essays and all of the technical scientific data to one spectacular point: "Science in its search for truth has sought independence from dogma, ostensibly religious doctrine, and yet scientists have clung pertinaciously to another doctrine that is so silken and seductive, so integral and unquestioned as to be as much the organizing principle of an entire discipline as an explanatory device of individual instances." The author's point? Evolutionary science has become it's own religion and it's like the Emperor's New Clothes. Can the immovable position of today's scientific community "be interpreted as anything but hesitance to open the eyes and face the deeper truth that obviously shines through the breaks and faults of a thin and fractured surface?"But all is not lost. "As the masses tremble before their god of science and its liturgies of statistics [and] society slumps into alienation," James Gills reminds us of the Truth and opens the door for grace; the intelligence we were gifted with to behold the beauty of the Designer's plan. "If we deign to look, we will see God's eye in the sun, His gesture in the bee's waggle dance, and His arms in the ocean's fragrant embrace."

Did you know that:--Evolutionists shirk their responsibility for explaining how it all started (19, 82-83,120)?--there is a lack of fossil evidence (20, 24, 85, 96-97, 116)?--that Evolution is never seen today (18)?--that Newton and Pasteur were Creationists, so we should be Creationists too (21, 64)?--that the Cambrian explosion causes a problem for Evolutionists (25, 96)?--that Kettlewell's study of moths does not prove macroevolution (11, 83)?--that dog breeders have been operating for hundreds of years, and all they ever get is more dogs (91)?--that Haeckel was a mean ugly man for publishing those distorted embryo drawings (13)?--that Evolutionists have never come up with an explanation for eye development which the Creationists will listen to (41, 51)?--that mutations are always harmful (55)?--that Evolutionists don't mention God in their writings, which means that they don't believe in God (86, 120)?--that "punctuated equilibrium" is nothing more than an apology for poverty of transitional fossils (104)?If you've already heard all this, then you've already read the first half of the book.No, wait--there is one new twist which I haven't seen before: Chapter 4, written by a guest writer, gives a description of DNA molecules. You are supposed to gasp in amazement at the wonder and complexity of the DNA molecule, and declare that nothing short of an all-wise and all-powerful designer could ever create such a thing.You are also supposed to forget that DNA is described in every freshman biology textbook, and is surely familiar to every biologist, no matter what his persuasion. It is also hoped that you don't know that Evolutionary researchers have hopped on DNA research from the very beginning, only to find that it confirms what they had been suspecting all along.The second half of the book deals with Michael Behe and his famous mousetrap. That part is too technical for me, so I stopped there.