Evolution objections

In hmolscience, evolution objections refers to one or more reasons as person has for objecting to the theory that humans have evolved over time (Darwin, 1959); metamorphosized from early chemical forms (Goethe, 1809); and or been synthesized, thermodynamically, over the last 13.8 billion years, via mechanism, from the atoms and forces, or fermions and bosons, of the universe.

1. Atomic | Objection
The following being the main seven compounded or aggregate non-theistic colloquial objections to evolution theory:


Term
Date
Model | Non-theological


------------------------------------------------------------------------



1.Fortuitous concourse of atoms450BCEmpedocles (see also: Thomson on religion)
2.Blind1800Friedrich Schiller (see: blind force)
3.Chance1859Charles Darwin (see: chance variation)
4.Mutation1901Hugo de Vries
5.Random1922Roy Sellars [1] (see also: random chance)
6.Accident1923Bertrand Russell (Ѻ)
7.Lucky1963Kurt Vonnegut
Richard Dawkins | 1995


A modern synopsis of the above position might well be called the "Dawkins view" being that Richard Dawkins has been the most vocal proponent, in recent years, of such views:

“In a universe of electrons and selfish genes, blind physical forces and genetic replication, some people are going to get hurt, other people are going to get lucky, and you won’t find any rhyme or reason [see: Adams creed; Newton in Senegal] in it, nor any justice. The universe that we observe has precisely the properties we should expect if there is, at bottom, no design, no purpose, no evil, no good, nothing but pitiless indifference.”
Richard Dawkins (1995), River Out of Eden (pg. 133); cited by Bo Jinn (2013) in Illogical Atheism (loc. 954)

In short, according to the above general model, humans, according to the Dawkins view, are a "lucky | accidental | random | chance | mutation | blind | fortuitous | concourse of atoms" derived entity; the following are example statements:

“To think that we just evolved from a bang, that we used to be monkeys, that seems unbelievable when you look at the complexity of the human body …. If you tell children there is no purpose to their life—that they are just a chemical mutation—that doesn’t build self-esteem.”
— Nigel McQuoid (2001), Headmaster of Emmanuel College

“The evolution of plants and animals? Perhaps other geologists also have questions about the mechanism of mutation (which varied its rate of effectiveness greatly in rocks), whether the ability to propagate is the difference between a fossil and its ancestor, how many such evolutions must occur before 'bad luck' is overcome and the newer variety replaces the older, which evolved features are not for propagation but just 'ride along' on the genetic material by a coincidental juxtaposition of genes, and - most importantly - whether 'good luck mutations' can occur fast enough to account for the fossil record.”
Bruce Bathurst (2009), “Why I am not a molecule?” [2]

The term "mutation" seems to crop up in purpose vs purposeless models of the universe debates and discussions. David Foster, e.g., has argues against “blind random chance mutation interpretations” of mutation-based Darwinism. Those who have theorized about mutation and entropy include: Pierre Levy, John Sanford, and the 1997 gentropy authors V. K. Savchennko and U. K. Sauchanka.
Molecules-to-man evolution (life)
The Ken Ham (1975) version of the "life objection" to the theory of evolution (see: molecules-to-man evolution).

2. Life | Objection
The second main objection (Ѻ), made by the theistic-holding mindset, is how do you get life from non-life. This objection has been resolved (see: defunct theory of lifelife does not existlife terminology upgrades).

Quotes

The following are related quotes:

“A wonder it must be that there should be any man found so stupid as to persuade himself that this most beautiful world could be produced by the fortuitous concourse of atoms.”
John Ray (c.1700) (Ѻ)

References
1. Sellars, Roy W. (1922). Evolutionary Naturalism (§15: Mechanism, Teleology, and Purpose, pgs. 320-; random, pg. 338). Open Court Publishing.
2. Bathurst, Bruce. (2009), “Why I Am Not a Molecule?” (Ѻ), Hmolpedia thread (post #4), Aug 24.

External links
Objections to evolution – Wikipedia.

TDics icon ns

More pages