February 5, 2010
Charles Darwin, the Skeptic
He wanted proof before accepting the paranormal and the
claims of psychics and homeopathy.
Charles Darwin, the Skeptic
He wanted proof before accepting the paranormal and the
claims of psychics and homeopathy.
SUMMARY: Charles Darwin has always been a polarizing figure, as seen by
the fact the new movie about his life, Creation, had trouble finding a distributor
in the U.S. The reason, according to the film's distributor, is that Darwin's theory
of evolution is too much of a "hot potato" in America. The film focuses on
Darwin writing his famous book, On the Origin of Species, but also portrays his
deeply religious wife, Emma, and their torment over their daughter Annie's
death.
Best known for his theory of evolution, Darwin did have a lesser-known side --
his skepticism, which he shared with his father. He demanded that he see
good evidence for extraordinary claims. His correspondence with friends,
family, and colleagues shows he held very skeptical views about psychics,
the paranormal, and alternative medicine.
In a Sept. 4, 1850 letter to a cousin, Darwin scathingly dismissed psychic
powers (clairvoyance) and homeopathy (the method of treating diseases with
small amounts of drugs that produce symptoms in a healthy person similar to
those of the disease). Darwin was strongly opposed to the illogical
homeopathic premise that tiny amounts of a drug are more effective than
larger doses. He noted that for homeopathy to be scientifically tested, it
would need to be studied against a control group.
A year earlier, in a letter dated March 19, Darwin wrote about the gullibility of
physician James Manby Gully, who as a spiritualist had treated Darwin's father.
"Dr. Gully was a spiritualist [a member of a group that regularly communicated
with the dead] & believer in clairvoyance [also known as ESP or mental
telepathy]. He bothered my father for some time to have a consultation with a
clairvoyant, who was . . .reputed to be able to see the insides of people &
discover the real nature of their ailments."
Darwin's father confronted a psychic who had impressed Dr. Gully and
challenged her to read the number on a banknote which was inside a sealed
envelope. The clairvoyante scornfully refused to try to do that and then went
on to incorrectly claim Darwin's father had all sorts of horrible internal
diseases,
(Pictures from Wikimedia Commons)
To read the entire article, click on this link to LIVESCIENCE.
COMMENT: Charles Darwin may have been a skeptic, but one wonders why
he wasn't more skeptical of his own theory of evolution. To be sure, he at
times raised some question marks.
Darwin wondered about how the human eye could have evolved. "To
suppose that the eye with all its inimitable contrivances for adjusting the focus
to different distances, for admitting different amounts of light, and for the
correction of spherical and chromatic aberration, could have been formed by
natural selection, seems, I freely confess, absurd in the highest degree," he
wrote in Chapter VI of his famous book. His doubts, of course, were not
enough to cause him to abandon his theory.
In the 1902 edition of Origins, Darwin wondered about the missing links. "The
number of intermediate varieties which have formerly existed on earth must be
truly enormous. Why then is not every geological formation and every stratum
full of such intermediate links? Geology assuredly does not reveal any such
finely graduated organic chain; and this, perhaps, is the most obvious and
gravest objection which can be urged against my theory."
Darwin's skeptical nature raises the serious question of whether Charles
Darwin would today be an evolutionist. We know far more today about the
complexity of the universe to the point that even secularists are admitting it
appears to be designed for human life. The Intelligent Design community is
showing how complex and well-designed even so-called simple organisms and
human cells appear to be, complexity which was far beyond about which
Darwin knew. As for the intermediate links, unless one counts a handful of
disputed fossils, they are yet to be found, this after 150 more years of
searching since Darwin's book was published. Today, Darwin would probably
be very discouraged.
While Christian creationists are often mocked for our beliefs, we have the
Word of the One who was there when the world was created. The Bible has
stood the test of time. It tells us where we came from and where we are going.
Let the world be skeptical about our belief that all believers in Jesus Christ as
Savior will inherit eternal life. Thanks to the faith God has given us, we know it
to be the truth.
****************************************************************************************************
Want to be automatically notified each time there is a new post? Just e-mail
your request to [admin@lutheranscience.org].
****************************************************************************************************
QUESTION OF THE DAY
What's the maximum amount of added sugar the American Heart
Association recommends in the daily diet?
****************************************************************************************************
NOTE ON VISITOR COMMENTS: Visitor comments are invited including
those containing alternate views. However, comments containing profanity
or advertisements will not be published. After posting a comment, please
allow several hours for it to appear on the blog.
*****************************************************************************************************
the fact the new movie about his life, Creation, had trouble finding a distributor
in the U.S. The reason, according to the film's distributor, is that Darwin's theory
of evolution is too much of a "hot potato" in America. The film focuses on
Darwin writing his famous book, On the Origin of Species, but also portrays his
deeply religious wife, Emma, and their torment over their daughter Annie's
death.
Best known for his theory of evolution, Darwin did have a lesser-known side --
his skepticism, which he shared with his father. He demanded that he see
good evidence for extraordinary claims. His correspondence with friends,
family, and colleagues shows he held very skeptical views about psychics,
the paranormal, and alternative medicine.
In a Sept. 4, 1850 letter to a cousin, Darwin scathingly dismissed psychic
powers (clairvoyance) and homeopathy (the method of treating diseases with
small amounts of drugs that produce symptoms in a healthy person similar to
those of the disease). Darwin was strongly opposed to the illogical
homeopathic premise that tiny amounts of a drug are more effective than
larger doses. He noted that for homeopathy to be scientifically tested, it
would need to be studied against a control group.
A year earlier, in a letter dated March 19, Darwin wrote about the gullibility of
physician James Manby Gully, who as a spiritualist had treated Darwin's father.
"Dr. Gully was a spiritualist [a member of a group that regularly communicated
with the dead] & believer in clairvoyance [also known as ESP or mental
telepathy]. He bothered my father for some time to have a consultation with a
clairvoyant, who was . . .reputed to be able to see the insides of people &
discover the real nature of their ailments."
Darwin's father confronted a psychic who had impressed Dr. Gully and
challenged her to read the number on a banknote which was inside a sealed
envelope. The clairvoyante scornfully refused to try to do that and then went
on to incorrectly claim Darwin's father had all sorts of horrible internal
diseases,
(Pictures from Wikimedia Commons)
To read the entire article, click on this link to LIVESCIENCE.
COMMENT: Charles Darwin may have been a skeptic, but one wonders why
he wasn't more skeptical of his own theory of evolution. To be sure, he at
times raised some question marks.
Darwin wondered about how the human eye could have evolved. "To
suppose that the eye with all its inimitable contrivances for adjusting the focus
to different distances, for admitting different amounts of light, and for the
correction of spherical and chromatic aberration, could have been formed by
natural selection, seems, I freely confess, absurd in the highest degree," he
wrote in Chapter VI of his famous book. His doubts, of course, were not
enough to cause him to abandon his theory.
In the 1902 edition of Origins, Darwin wondered about the missing links. "The
number of intermediate varieties which have formerly existed on earth must be
truly enormous. Why then is not every geological formation and every stratum
full of such intermediate links? Geology assuredly does not reveal any such
finely graduated organic chain; and this, perhaps, is the most obvious and
gravest objection which can be urged against my theory."
Darwin's skeptical nature raises the serious question of whether Charles
Darwin would today be an evolutionist. We know far more today about the
complexity of the universe to the point that even secularists are admitting it
appears to be designed for human life. The Intelligent Design community is
showing how complex and well-designed even so-called simple organisms and
human cells appear to be, complexity which was far beyond about which
Darwin knew. As for the intermediate links, unless one counts a handful of
disputed fossils, they are yet to be found, this after 150 more years of
searching since Darwin's book was published. Today, Darwin would probably
be very discouraged.
While Christian creationists are often mocked for our beliefs, we have the
Word of the One who was there when the world was created. The Bible has
stood the test of time. It tells us where we came from and where we are going.
Let the world be skeptical about our belief that all believers in Jesus Christ as
Savior will inherit eternal life. Thanks to the faith God has given us, we know it
to be the truth.
****************************************************************************************************
Want to be automatically notified each time there is a new post? Just e-mail
your request to [admin@lutheranscience.org].
****************************************************************************************************
QUESTION OF THE DAY
What's the maximum amount of added sugar the American Heart
Association recommends in the daily diet?
****************************************************************************************************
NOTE ON VISITOR COMMENTS: Visitor comments are invited including
those containing alternate views. However, comments containing profanity
or advertisements will not be published. After posting a comment, please
allow several hours for it to appear on the blog.
*****************************************************************************************************
2 Comments
Mark wrote: It always boggles my mind that evolutionists are so staunch in there
beliefs that everything just happened. The evidence for design is overwhelming.
Dawkins and Crick have thrown in the Directed Panspermia theory
(http://www.ziztur.com/2009/04/richard-dawkins-believes-aliens-seeded.html)
but yet just can't bring themselves to see that God is even a possibility.
For the foolishness of God is wiser than man's wisdom, and the weakness of God is
stronger than man's strength. 1 Corinthians 1:25
Mark Bergemann wrote: Well, Darwin and I do agree on homeopathy. On God and
creation we hold opposing views.
Mark wrote: It always boggles my mind that evolutionists are so staunch in there
beliefs that everything just happened. The evidence for design is overwhelming.
Dawkins and Crick have thrown in the Directed Panspermia theory
(http://www.ziztur.com/2009/04/richard-dawkins-believes-aliens-seeded.html)
but yet just can't bring themselves to see that God is even a possibility.
For the foolishness of God is wiser than man's wisdom, and the weakness of God is
stronger than man's strength. 1 Corinthians 1:25
Mark Bergemann wrote: Well, Darwin and I do agree on homeopathy. On God and
creation we hold opposing views.
| LSI stands for the Lutheran Science Institute, an organization of WELS and ELS Lutherans interested in science and health issues with a special emphasis on the creation and evolution controversy. This blog's purpose is to search the Internet to find articles of interest to Christians. Views expressed are those of the author (Warren Krug) and are not necessarily those of the Lutheran Science Institute, Inc. |
For women, 100 calories; for men, 150 calories. The
average American averages about 350 calories of added
sugar (added from processing or at the table) which is
equal to more than 22 teaspoons of sugar. One sugary
soft drink contains about 130 calories.
Source: USA Weekend (November 6-8, 2009)
average American averages about 350 calories of added
sugar (added from processing or at the table) which is
equal to more than 22 teaspoons of sugar. One sugary
soft drink contains about 130 calories.
Source: USA Weekend (November 6-8, 2009)
