New Page 1

	Sign In Sign-Up

Clearing Up a Few Misconceptions
About Charles Darwin
by Michel Archer
(Home)

I have noticed that among those who applaud the work of Charles Darwin, that there are certain misconceptions about the man which should be cleared up. For instance, I have heard Darwinists condemn creationists leaders for having a ‘lack of credentials.’ Just yesterday, a fan of Darwin gave me the following complaint: “ Dr. Hovind is trained as an educator, your Dr. Morris has his doctorate in civil engineering…there’s no one in the creationist camp who is really trained and educated in biology to the extent of Charles Darwin.”

I suggest that it is a good thing they were not trained in biology ’to the extent of Charles Darwin,’ because Charles Darwin was NOT a trained biologist and held no degree in that area of study.

Let’s talk about Darwin’s educational background. According to his biographers, Darwin attended Revd. Case’s grammar school in Shrewsbury, England, where he was described as ‘lazy,’ a poor student, and a slow learner. He had a particularly difficult time learning Greek, a subject, which like most of his studies, he is said to have found painfully boring. It is said, he would memorize short snippets of classical verse only to have the memory of them dissipate by the following day.

He did enjoy collecting things, however. He would collect everything from stamps to shells, although he did not seem to make any particular study of the things he collected, but seemed to do so for the sheer pleasure of gathering things. This was not enough to give him success in school, so at the age of sixteen, his father had him withdrawn, chiding him that Charles, “cared for nothing but shooting, dogs, and rat-catching, and you will be a disgrace to yourself and all of your family.”

Terribly afraid that his son would grow up to be an idle, unfocused, ‘country-gentleman,’ Darwin’s father decided his son would follow in the family footsteps and become a doctor. So in October of 1825, Charles Darwin, by order of his father, began his medical studies at the University of Edinburgh. However, here his old habits cost him. He found himself once again bored and tended to spend his nights playing cards and drinking rather than studying. After two years, it became painfully evident he would not become a doctor, so his father had him withdraw once again.

In this time frame Darwin became familiar with the work of his grandfather, Erasmus Darwin. This point is important to bring up, because another belief held by Darwinists, is that he came up with his evolutionary theory based solely on his own observations. One Darwinist in formed me, “Unlike you creationists, Darwin did his own research and never plagiarized a soul!”

If one ‘borrows’ from a family member I believe it’s still plagiarism. Charles Darwin stole ’his’ theory from his own grandfather. Some sixty-five years before, “The Origin of Species,” ever saw print, Erasmus published his, “Zoonomia,” a huge medical teatise written in prose which has been called the first all-embracing hypothesis of evolution.

Erasmus was a profoundly anti-Christian, atheist, and had this motto painted on the side of his carriage to publicize his opinion of the matter: ‘E Conchis omnia,’ Latin for, ‘everything from shells,’ nothing from God. The opinion did not go unnoticed. Canon Seward of Lichfield Cathedral wrote some verses chiding Darwin..

“….renounces his Creator, And forms all sense from senseless matter. Great wizard he! By magic spells, Can all things raise from cockle shells?”

Almost every topic discussed and example given in ‘Zoonomia’ reappears in Charles’s ‘Origin.’ Actually, according to three of his biographer’s, all of Charles’s books have their counterpart in a chapter of Zoonomia or an essay-note to one of Erasmus’s poems.

So Erasmus, and his atheism, cast a long shadow via his grandson.

Charles father next attempted to have him study for the ministry. However, Charles was only interested in this line of work because it would give him respectability and allow him time to collect insects. Again, he was a poor student and spent his time at parties or studying nature from a purely materialistic, rather than a supernatural point of view. I do not know if Darwin earned a degree in Theology or not. Some biographers say he did, others say he dropped out of school again and after his frantic father had spread the word to this effect, a well-known academic of the day got him a job on the ’Beagle.’

I do not believe it is too far a stretch to imagine the ever lazy Darwin, seeing the opportunity to make a name for himself, using the ‘Beagle’s’ voyage as his chance to put his grandfather’s words to paper and call them his own. I think this is why he leaves the wording in ‘Origins’ so open with comments about how other’s will eventually find evidence to support ‘his findings.’ In the mean time real scientists like Gregor Mendel were laying the groundwork to explain why species do NOT experience fundamental change as Erasmus/Charles insisted, and Lord Kelvin was working out the two laws of thermodynamics, which explains that energy can be neither destroyed or created and that entropy puts biology (and everything else) on a ’down-ward swing.’ Unlike evolution which says man is getting bigger, smarter (eventually god-like.) These were ‘hands-on’ scientists. Not theoreticians.

And while we’re at it, there were many brilliant scientists during this time, who were also ’hands-on.’ In other words, they sought to answer questions, formulated hypothesis, researched, experimented and recorded their results. Which is what Erasmus/Charles failed to do.

Sir John Herschel, famous mathematician, astronomer and Fellow of the Royal Society, disliked Darwin’s theory so much that he called it ‘the law of higgledy-pigglety. The brilliant physicist James Clerk Maxwell strenuously opposed Darwinism. Renowned science philosopher William Whewell, wouldn’t even let Darwin’s book into the Cambridge library.

There were many others, such as Adam Sedgwick the geologist (who taught Darwin the elements of field geology) and Andrew Murray the entomologist, who all decided firmly against Darwin’s theory. Sedgwick even wrote to Darwin after he read his book, telling him, ‘I have read your book with more pain than pleasure. Parts of it I admired greatly, parts I laughed at till my sides were almost sore; other parts I read with absolute sorrow, because I think them utterly false and grievously mischievous.’

Richard Owen, the Superintendent of the Natural History Department of the British Museum and the man who coined the word ‘dinosaur,’ despised Darwin‘s work. Owen opposed Darwin’s work so much that in 1863, Darwin wrote to fellow evolutionist Huxley saying how upset he was with Owen’s criticism: ‘I am burning with indignation … I could not get to sleep until past three last night for indigestion.’ Later on, Darwin again expressed his feelings about Owen to his friend Hooker: ‘I believe I hate him more than you do.’

Hmmm, cold, Charles, cold.

Louis Agassiz, the founder of modern glacial geology, and Louis Pasteur (who pioneered immunization, developed the Law of Biogenesis….life comes only from life {not shells} the fundamental law of biology… were both strenuously opposed to Darwin’s theory.

So the ‘credentials’ of Charles Darwin are, to put it kindly, poor. We have a lazy kid who drops out of school, steals his grandfather’s work and manages to make atheism the social status quo, despite the fact that the greatest scientific (not theological) minds of his day thought he had lost his. How does this happen? I think because Darwin’s theory plays to the baser side of man’s character, that just maybe there isn’t a God and so perhaps he can get away with that which is ungodly.

Dear Lord, what a horrible legacy.

So, Dr.’s Hovind and Morris were certainly not trained in biology to the extent of Charles Darwin and this is just one, among many reason’s, why I respect their work.

The following books were used in the back background of this article:

King-Hele, D. ‘Erasmus Darwin.’

Barlow, N. ’The Autobiography of Charles Darwin.’

Colliers Encyclopedia

Desmond, A. and Moore, J. ’Darwin.’

Desmond, A. and Moore, J. ‘Darwin: the Life of a Tormented Evolutionist.’

www.gospelcom.net

And for a short list of creation scientists who are trained in biology please see:

http://www.icr.org/creationscientis...scientists.html

Michel Archer may be reacher at: Michele501@msn.com