Charles Darwin was NOT a scientist

The $cientism and its unholy Church of Darwin is anti-science, absurd and insulting.

Charles Darwin is a name that has been revered for years as the ‘father’ of the materialist non-science and philosophy called ‘evolution’, celebrated as one of the most prominent ‘scientists’ in history.  In actual fact, his theories can be found in pagan Greece long before Aristotle, with Lucretius and other Romans positing the same magical appearance of species, forms and metamorphoses, as they mused over the ‘nature of things’.  Darwin’s warmed-over theory of ‘natural selection’ (the magical selector-friend being indifferent-nature), was outlined in his philosophical book "On the Origin of Species," and has been taught to generations and widely accepted as scientific fact.  It is rather insane that 19^th century Victoria ideas on breeding, are now considered ‘science’ when it comes to the creation of life, the earth and the universe.  But in an age of Corona, ‘moon landings’, and endless wars for ‘democracy’, nothing much surprises.  Darwin believed that a bear could turn into a whale. 

'I can see no difficulty in a race of bears being rendered, by natural selection, more and more aquatic in their habits, with larger and larger mouths, till a creature was produced as monstrous as a whale.' Here we have Darwin's central idea of evolution in a nutshell: bears can become whales, or whale-like, given enough time and enough natural selection. One species can turn into a completely different species by natural selection alone.’

Anyone with an IQ over a certain level reads the above and laughs out loud.  How ridiculous is the above fantasy posing as science?  But wait, wail the Darwinians, he retracted that, and we the Darwinian acolytes, now believe that the pakicetus wolf became the whale.  So much science.  Thank Darwin (not God), for the cult’s magic fairies and friends.  Darwin himself doubted his own theory (see a video about Darwin’s own doubt and public avowal that species in fact never did change).

Charles Darwin was not a scientist.  Like so many other ‘intellectuals’ of poor quality, he never worked.  He never held a job.  He bred pigeons.  He was never engaged as a real ‘scientist’.  He was part of a bubble, the Victorian-aristocratic world of materialist-philosophy and ‘realism’, part of a small cadre of wealthy hand-wavers, who were intent to elevate themselves, their ideas, their clubs, their beliefs and accrete power and influence.  When his daughter died, Darwin raged against God and Christianity.  Grief is understandable but I would ask, why does God have anything to do with the death of his child?  Is God ever credited with the good, and only to be blamed for the bad?  God is in life, present in death, but not the cause natural life cycles, or the afflictions of disease and all the rest that mar our fallen world. 

Darwin’s theory was thus a reaction of bitterness laced with hatred.  He philosophised about life without performing any experiments at any time, to confirm the myriad statements, assumptions and guesses.  Darwin’s entire program was to erect materialism and naturalism, with rather crude Victorian ideas on breeding, and apply the same to nature, and displace Christianity, creation, design and the complexity of life with meaningless chance, and physical matter.  In Darwin’s world only the physical mattered, not the immaterial, the spiritual, the intuitive or the moral.  Viewed in the totality of life, and in the glare of light, even at an abstract, first-year philosophy degree level, Darwin’s theorem on evolution is an absurdity based largely on his experience breeding pigeons.  Why would breeding pigeons be relevant when discussing life, how it began, or the perfect design of creatures and creation, or the 1 million meta-species and fauna now existent?  Breeding pigeons has little to do with anything.

The only attribution, which is mildly related to science, which can be somewhat attached to Darwin is the analysis of finch beaks on the Galapagos islands.  But here is a news flash for Chuck.  Regardless of beak size they are still finches and they remain birds and none ‘mutated’ over millions, billions, trillions of years, or whatever long-ages Darwinian acolytes need, into whales.  In my backyard I have 5 bird feeders and 5-6 different ‘kinds’ of finches.  All are the same size, shape and can inter-breed.  Many have different sized beaks and different plumage.  Yet finches they remain, and they will mate with other finches from within or from outside of their purported and very arbitrarily designated ‘species’.  The brown finch has no problem reproducing with a green finch and their offspring, given the constraints of bird DNA and genomic code, will forever remain birds.  Sorry Chuck, finch beaks have precious little to do with anything.

Some obvious objections to Darwin’s Religion

Epigenetics and adaptation have nothing to do with ‘evolution’.  DNA and genomic code provide considerable and irrevocable constraints to what a species and organism will look like and how it will be built and behave.

Chemical Evolution, Mutations to promote change and Natural Selection have no basis in science and have long been destroyed.

Cell and DNA complexity cannot be explained by Darwin’s cult.  Humans have 70 trillion cells, all formed from 1 zygote.  How would that occur in the stuff-happens-world?

DNA and genetic software code can make itself, self-repair, self-factor, or self-diagnose. 

The arrival by chance of a single protein in nature or a warm-soupy-pond is impossible.  We have millions of functional proteins.

The idea of junk DNA is junk science based on Darwinian ignorance.

No positive mutations are known.  All mutations are negative or neutral.  See cancer, radiation, down’s syndrome for more information. 

Abiogenesis is anti-science, and statistically impossible.

Even the Religious in the Church of Darwin know that abiogenesis is impossible.

A good summary of Darwin’s epic fail can be found in Vance Ferrell’s ‘Evolutionary Handbook’.

Wiker’s book on how Darwinism leads to Social Darwinism, lack of morality, violence and anti-science.

Richard Weikart’s book on the direct path from Darwinism to eugenics and dare we say it, Nazism.

Sundry works by the indefatigable Jerry Bergman including Hitler and the Nazi-Darwinian view outline the immense cultural and social disaster that is Darwinism

The Earth’s magnetic shield is weakening at the rate of 0.5% or more per century. There is no magic re-energising of the shield (nickel, iron and the earth’s magnetic core cause it). This dates the earth to a young age. Recent satellite observations show a dimming or de-energising Sun (a hydrogen bomb), of about 0.1% in the past 50 years and it is shrinking (Greenwich Observatory England), by about 0.1% per century. If the above is correct, it again dates the earth to a young age, or else the Sun at some point, roughly 100.000 years ago, would have been double its current size, meaning no life on this planet.

None of the above objections, plus 100 more than can be offered, are allowed of course.  No questions of $cientism and the Church of Darwin are allowed in any fora, not in the school system, not in the media, not online, never in academic circles or journals of any type.  None. This is of course, the opposite of real science and free speech.  The unholy Church of Darwin is part of $cientism, and is a member of $cientism’s unholy Trinity which includes Climate-nonsense, and Corona-flu scamdemics.  Obey and believe.

Bottom Line with the Apostle Darwin

It is clear that Charles Darwin was not a scientist in the true sense of the word. His theories lacked evidence and were based on mere speculation. Despite his popularity, he cannot be considered as a credible source or authority in biology. The tautological, insipid and rather meaningless theory of ‘natural selection’ (I survived, I procreated, therefore I am naturally-selected….’) has been widely discredited due to its lack of scientific proof. It is merely a hypothesis without any concrete experiments or DNA evidence to support it. 

Meta-evolution or apes evolving into men, requires billions of changes to DNA and information sets.  None of this is proven, none is observed, none has existed.  The fossil record, far from helping Darwin, destroys it, since not a single example can be given of missing links, changing forms, or a species going from simple to complex.  Moreover, his ignorance of biochemistry further undermines his credibility as a scientist. Biochemistry plays an essential role in understanding how living organisms function at the cellular level, knowledge that Darwin lacked.  DNA by itself disproves his pigeon-breeding based philosophy applied to nature and life. As noted the idea of long ages is also a myth, with radioactive carbon dating of the atmosphere indicating a young earth.  In short there is no proof whatsoever to support the $cientism of Darwin.

Darwin’s Religion and Transhumanism

Darwin was just another philosopher, and it must be said, an unoriginal and very poor one at that. So why do the elite embrace and promote it? Easy. Darwinism reduces the human to a virus or worse. Under the guise of $cientism, it dehumanises, impersonalises and renders you disposable. You are not special as per the Bible and Genesis. You are simply a hairless ape, and a rapacious and unpleasant one at that. You are ravaging Gaia and and are in the main a useless eater and demon. You must therefore be managed, censored, beaten, organised, controlled and probably for billions of you, extirpated, all to save Gaia and to restore balance and harmony.

Darwinism is useful to both demean and debase the average human, rendering the individual as without value, to promote state control and as evidenced from the Corona fascism and scamdemic, to ‘evolve’ human consciousness and bodily form into a ‘superior’ trans-humanist and avatar being. Just add mRNA poison. Hence the Rona $cientism as a pilot project at DNA modification and compliance and ‘evolution’. Darwinism is the perfect religion of obeisance and compliance for state genetic experimentation. How could anyone dare to object to more state control, mRNA adjustants and complex ‘science’ for ‘health and safety’, and to save Gaia, climate and the universe itself? How can anyone object to ‘technology’ to ‘evolve’ the hairless ape called the human, into an transcendent, truly conscious, advanced transhuman-cyborg. It is simply ‘Darwin’s Destiny’ is it not?