THE NATURAL SCIENCES KNOW NOTHING OF EVOLUTION by A.E. Wilder-Smith
One of the few scientists in the world to have earned three-doctorates, A.E. Wilder-Smith had superlative white-coated credentials. The guy was a brainiac. He was one of the giants upon whose shoulders the modern “Intelligent Design Movement” is now standing. He wrote this in 1981. It is surprisingly thin in number of pages, but the pages are often dense with scientific principles and scientific language. And yet somehow this is quite readable for the layman like myself.
Early on, he only cursorily addresses the fallacy of “theistic evolution,” devoting the rest of the book to breaking apart and basically scientifically deconstructing and dismantling naturalistic evolution, i.e., modern neodarwinism. He exposes neodarwinism as–sure enough–a philosophy posing as a science. He relies much on the same arguments that the modern “ID Movement” pundits now use, but some of his arguments and scientific facts are unique to him even to this day, so far as this reader can tell. If I were to elaborate on his scientific reasoning, I would be at this book review for a very long time, and I am not about to do that. Go read it. I will say this: He has much to say in scientific detail about enzymes and enzymatic actions and interactions.
Oh, there are also a few tantalizing paragraphs about the human-along-with-dinosaur footprints in Glen Rose, Texas. Apparently, Dr. Wilder-Smith suspected that those were authentic. Given the dismal track record of evolutionary paleontologists’ veracity, they probably were/are.
I bought this book after I was in a sort of debate with a theistic (and theosophical) darwinist. I have long since seen the stupidity of purely naturalistic “evolution.” But this theosophist I encountered, his panspermaic views definitely put a different twist on darwinian philosophy. So that topic, theistic evolution, was fresh with me when I obtained this book. Not that creationists avoid the topic of theistic “evolution” in general–quite the contrary. However, Dr. Wilder-Smith does not address it much; one could still manage to believe in a form of theistic evolution after reading this book, should one prefer such a faith system. But one simply cannot retain a belief in a purely naturalistic, neodarwinian explanation of the Origin of Life, not unless one is insane, terribly ignorant, or flat-out hopelessly wicked and in wanton rebellion against his Creator. For everybody else, Wilder-Smith rationally and scientifically removes the naturalistic option from the discussion of possibilites for why we are here.
Rating: Δ Δ Δ Δ