Dialogues with Evolutionists--Parts 2 and 3
Deconstructing Evolution: A Facebook Comment Thread Post-Mortem
[This is Creation Reformation’s newsletter. Will you subscribe? (It will make our day!) Enjoy!]
Recall that we recently launched a first at Creation Reformation! We released our first video in a series called “Dialogues with Evolutionists.” In it we walk through a long online “conversation” with an evolutionist to show how one can effectively focus an attack at the heart of evolutionary theory: natural selection.
Today I am linking to two more of our “Dialogues with Evolutionists” videos: Part 2 and Part 3. Currently there are five! More to come!
In all our conversations with evolutionists we ask the same question: "If throughout evolutionary history genetic variation in offspring resulted in descent with modification of varied organisms in populations, but natural selection did not operate in nature, how many of today's species would exist?"
If you think about that question, you will see the rationale behind what we call The Natural Selection Paradox, and it kills evolution as an explanation for current living things. It does so by putting a stake through the heart of evolutionary theory: Natural Selection.
If throughout evolutionary history genetic variation in offspring resulted in descent with modification of varied organisms in populations, but natural selection did not operate in nature, how many of today's species would exist?
In this installment, we respond to a theistic evolutionist (Bill C.) who accused us of being blasphemers! See how we respond here:
Here is another where we engage a teacher of “life sciences” (Vernon) who cannot answer our simple question about natural selection (above):
Our Youtube videos are a bit long and will likely appeal only to evolution nerds. If you are one, enjoy! If you know one, please share! Below we explain the strategy behind the message of this new video series.
At Creation Reformation we continuously strive for ways to communicate a single, evolution-destroying message. If our elegantly simple message ever got “legs,” it would run roughshod over evolutionary theory as an explanation for all current living things.
I have spent decades in this debate and have decided that Creation Reformation’s current simple message is the only hope for toppling evolutionary theory as the creation narrative for all living things.
Our laser-targeted message bypasses all the standard, easily rationalized, attacks on evolution. We have found that evolutionists yawn at arguments based on probabilities, deride arguments based on design, ignore arguments based on fine tuning, falsely appeal to the sun to show no violation of the Second Law of Thermodynamics, and on and on. I have spent decades in this debate and have decided that Creation Reformation’s current simple message is the only hope for toppling evolutionary theory as the creation narrative for all living things.
What is that message? It is summarized in this statement: “Natural selection played no role in the evolution of any current life form.”1
“Natural selection played no role in the evolution of any current life form.”
Wild, right? If that is a true statement, it is the best and only sure hope of logically knocking the keystone of natural selection from the solid arch of Darwinian evolutionary theory. There is simply no avoiding the rational implications of that statement.
In February 2022 I introduced the statement above as The Natural Selection Paradox, with supporting arguments to show that it is, indeed, a true statement. The full explanation of the truth of The Natural Selection Paradox, as well as examples of mainstream science organizations and universities in agreement, can be found at www.naturalselectionparadox.com.
Years of bruising dialogues with evolutionists have forced me to continuously revise the explanatory statement as I try to simplify a non-intuitive idea for what is, unfortunately, a nuanced and confounding subject. The latest explanation of The Natural Selection Paradox is explained in a paper entitled, Natural Selection: Evolution’s Deceptive Disconnect.
Since February 2022, I’ve interacted with hundreds of evolutionists of all stripes in an effort to have The Natural Selection Paradox refuted. I’ve invited formal rebuttals, complete with an easy format form to do so. Over the years I’ve had some very savvy evolutionists take their best shots, and I’ve endured the ramblings of confused ideologues. These dialogues on my blog and Facebook page have proved valuable and instrumental in driving me to hone my arguments. Yet to date, no one has successfully refuted The Natural Selection Paradox.
The Natural Selection Paradox kills evolution as an explanation for current living things. It does so by putting a stake through the heart of evolutionary theory: Natural Selection.
Interestingly, I find very little (actually, no) interest among creationists to consider The Natural Selection Paradox, and to see it for what it is: a stake through the heart of evolutionary theory. Aside from the understandable incredulity that such a statement can be true, it seems most creationists are busy arguing among themselves about the age of the earth or whether Genesis is six literal days or not. But non-Christians are uninterested Biblical interpretations, and the internecine strife serves only to bolster their own confidence in evolution, strengthening their notions of Christians being science-deniers, and evolutionary theory being true.
To illustrate the truth of The Natural Selection Paradox, the video in this post recounts a real-life interchange with an evolutionist. As you will see, my typical approach is to use Socratic questioning to lead a person step-by-step logically to truth. By simply asking questions I often lead an evolutionist to agree The Natural Selection Paradox is logically sound.
It is simply unfathomable to evolutionists that natural selection played no role in the evolution of current living things.
However, usually, when asked to plainly state what he or she has already plainly acknowledged as true via answers to questions, the evolutionist quickly begins to prevaricate, backpedal, and otherwise shut down, sometimes with obscenity-laced tirades, often hidden from the comments by Facebook! Two examples of replying with obscene, juvenile responses to our dialogues are currently in the comments of a recent Facebook post.
It is simply unfathomable to evolutionists that natural selection played no role in the evolution of current living things. They accuse me of “gotcha questions,” trickery, and repeat clearly debunked notions, all in an effort to preserve their ideological creation narrative, which must involve natural selection.
The comment thread recounted in the posted video is also from a recent Facebook post, and it a best-case scenario in which the evolutionist remains calm and civil. Hopefully, seeing The Natural Selection Paradox demonstrated via Q&A might get some more attention and exposure among influencers in the “creation vs evolution” space. If you are an influencer, or know one, please share this post!
I also welcome critique. I need help. Am I wrong? Am I not being clear in my responses? I am trying to be razor sharp in my questions and statements, being precise because this entire topic is fraught with term conflation, idea confusion, and general ideological obstinance. I can get impatient with failure to answer simple questions with simple answers, especially when it’s clear the commenter will not, as opposed to cannot, answer. And I know my impatience often shows; it often manifests in a “Answer my question in the first sentence of your next comment, or it will be ignored” kind of response. But can I do better? Please let me know.
Enjoy!
Note that this statement is not denying that evolution is a fact, or that natural selection does nothing in nature. The statement is carefully and precisely worded and refers to the role of natural selection in explaining all current living things.
(C) 2024 Creation Reformation. Roddy Bullock is the founder of Creation Reformation and author of several books related to creation and evolution. For more information, visit www.creationreformation.com, or visit (and follow!) us at Facebook.
Please send editorial comments, including indications of typos and grammatical errors to info@creationreformation.com. If you want to know why there are typos, see my post On the Origin of Pieces by Means of Natural Correction. Enjoy!