jump to navigation

Evolution is finished! December 25, 2007

Posted by John A. Davison in general.
trackback

In 2004 I published a paper “Is Evolution Finished?” Rivista di Biologia/Biology Forum 97: 111-116. I now rearrange the words and offer it as a challenge to those who claim otherwise. 

It is my conviction that creative evolution is a phenomenon of the distant past. Just as ontogeny is a self-limiting process terminating in the adult organism and its subsequent death,  phylogeny has had a similar history resulting in the current biota. I see no evidence for the emergence of any new life forms, only trivial variations in existing species. In the distant past creative evolution and extinction were occurring simultaneously.  That is no longer evident. This idea is not original with me and has been suggested by such distinguished scientists as Robert Broom, Julian Huxley and Pierre Grasse. I have simply extended their conclusions to include true speciation. Stated another way, there is no longer a balance between creative evolution and extinction. Related to this sequence is the evidence that Homo sapiens seems to be the youngest mammal ever to appear which suggests a goal directed process, now complete. Extinction is rampant as fragile habitats are being destroyed by human activity and with them all those species restricted to those habitats. The exact number of known species is unknown with estimates ranging from one to ten million, but that tens of thousands of them have become and are becoming extinct cannot be denied. I know of not a single  replacement. If others think they do, please use this opportunity to identify it along with its immediate ancestor and the cytogenetic mechansim by which it was produced.

I realize this perspective is in marked contrast to the Darwinian model. I present it confident that the Darwinians will ignore this opportunity to defend their paradigm in open discussion. The atheist Darwinian establishment has traditionally pretended that they had no critics and I offer this challenge primarily to demonstrate to the scientific community that little has changed in the century and a half since the publication of Darwin’s “Origin of Species,” a book which offers, in my opinion, absolutely nothing of substance relating to its title. 

The reason that this challenge will not be met is because the “establishment” now realizes that their model is a dismal failure. Rather than admit that they have dedicated their professional lives to a phantom, they have chosen to lash out blindly at all who recognize that chance could never have had anything to do with the origin or the susequent history of either ontogeny or phylogeny.

“Neither in the one nor in the other is there room for chance.”
Leo Berg, Nomogenesis, page 134.

A past evolution is undeniable, a present evolution undemonstrable.

MERRY CHRISTMAS

Advertisements

Comments»

1. John A. Davison - November 24, 2010

Here is some more from Fred the Bulbous Squidge followed by my response.

Fred the Bulbous Squidge says: November 23, 2010 at 5:44 pm

@Fluppy the Wonder Whelk

Ah, come on now. We all know you’re just a clever satirical device really.

Nobody could possibly be as bonkers as you make out to be!

Reply

John A. Davison says: November 23, 2010 at 9:15 pm

As long as you Darwimps regard me as bonkers I am in good shape. I can assure you that I meant every word I have ever written, whether in the peer reviewed literature, on my weblog, or on the weblogs of other. That includes this one. I will make every one of you poor souls wish you had never screwed with me. Trust me or not. Either way you’re toast. You ought to take a lesson from Clinton Richard Dawkins. He has better sense than to mess with me and my distinguished sources. If anyone is truly bonkers it is Dawkins. He lives in a fantasy world entirely of his own making. I predict he will end up in a rubber room.

Don’t stop what you are doing and please get others to pile on. Buy my book. I am sure you will find a lot more there to ridicule.

It doesn’t get any better than this.

I love it so!

jadavison.wordpress.com

Reply

2. 1dublin - November 24, 2010

So this is all they have? They can’t debate so they character assassinate. The great Atheist empire seems to be slipping away. Do yo think they will ever come up with any kind of evidence to support their fairy tale…or ever try to communicate with you without a string of insults. Not a very impressive way to communicate on their part John. If they were just honest and said you scared them that would be one thing but just throwing insults at you really is most revealing and reveal how truly desperate they are.

3. John A. Davison - November 24, 2010

The real probem is that I am acting virtually alone. If others would go after them with half the energy I expend, they would soon be forced to react. There are sins of omission as well as sins of commision and those who allow these intellectual tyrants to run amok are just as guilty as the tyrants themselves. I’m through asking for support but that does not mean that I don’t exect it to materialize. Darwinians are schoolyard bullies and nothing more. They wilt like day lilies but only when they are given no other choice.

Like it or not, we are engaged in a war for the survival of Western Civilization. Are we still free or have we become victims? It is as simple as that.

4. John A. Davison - November 25, 2010

http://phylogenous.wordpress.com/2010/09/20/personal-beliefs-impact-upon-the-synthesis/#comment-248

This is an interesting new blog produced by one of Pee Zee Myers’ students. You will notice that while I am allowed to present my thesis there, it is evoking no response.

I had hoped that younger minds might be more tolerant but apparently that is not to be. We critics of the Darwinian fantasy still are not allowed to exist. Nothing has changed in a century and a half. The atheist establishment still prevails as Darwinian academics like Pee Zee Myers continue successfully to perpetuate the greatest hoax in the history of science.
_____________________________________________________________________

Also, if anyone knows who is running the phylointelligence blog

http://www.phylointelligence.org/

please let me know who it is. I can’t believe that we now have blogs run by unknowns. I have left messages there but they don’t appear nor are they acknowledged.

5. John A. Davison - November 26, 2010

Be sure to check out the first blog in message #324 because my friend Peter Borger showed up to support me. That is an important new development because Peter Borger is a real scientist.

6. John A. Davison - November 27, 2010

Below is my latest response to Mark John Brewer at “This Scientific Life,” Bob O’Hara and Devorah Bennu’s blog at “Scientopia.” They insist on treating me with contempt, oblivious to what they are doing to themselves in the process.

John A. Davison says: November 27, 2010 at 10:31 am

Fat Freddy aka Mark John Brewer

Let the record show that Mark John Brewer claims I need psychiatric help. That is exactly what I want to hear and from the more the merrier. You have joined with Paul Zachary Myers who also thinks I am daft and has put it in writing. So what we have now is a clear demarcation between Darwinian mysticism and real science. I am willing to bet that you can’t get Bob O’Hara or Devorah Bennu or Mark Chiu-Carroll or anyone else at Scientopia to say I am in need of psychiatric help.

Since you have nothing else to do anyway, why don’t you see how many signatures you can muster from real people who are willing to join with you? I’m betting you won’t get any. You see you belong to a pretty exclusive club and I intend to make you famous. I already have.

Now get busy and do as your told. I’ll look for that list.

jadavison.wordpress.com

Reply

7. John A. Davison - November 29, 2010

My latest at the above blog follows –

John A. Davison says: November 30, 2010 at 3:09 am

Fred the Bulbus Squidge aka Mark John Brewer

Every Darwinian I have ever known was absolutely convinced of his position. Darwinians are all egomaniacs, all atheists (whether they will admit it or not) and 95% of them are left wing political liberals as well. You see Darwinians don’t believe in anything . That is why liberals are also known as relativists. In short, Darwinians are not scientists and I can’t think of a single truly first class Darwinian scientist. By way of contrast, every one of my several sources was not only a first rate scientist in his own field, but not one was a religious or atheist fanatic. Most prominent Darwinians like Pee Zee Myers and Richard Dawkins are Marxist revolutionaries just like Stephen Jay Gould was before them. The vast majority of academics are arrogant, atheist, left wing fanatics who openly despise the Judeo-Chrstian ethic. It doesn’t take a rocket scientist to reach that conclusion as it is evident in every “forum” which supports the Darwnian hoax. They are also cowards who typically muzzle their critics either by ignoring them, by banishing them or, as is the mode here at Scientopia, by treating them with open contempt and then banishing them, Mark Chiu-Carroll’s method of choice. Many Darwinian weblogs also promote obscenity and they are all laced with pseudonymous blowhards.

Thanks for enabling me to put that little summary on record. I meant every word of it.

I have no persecution complex either. That is another myth dreamed up out of thin air. I am a sadist, gleefully satisfying the masochistic tendencies of those who must hide their real identities with such self-deprecating handles as Fred the Bulbous Squidge. No real scientist would dream of treating himself with such flagrant contempt. No real scientist would treat a colleague as I have been treated both here and elsewhere either. I am proud of my history both as a scientist and citizen and I thrive on insult and denigration because they only define the character of those who employ such tactics.

“First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win.”
Mahatma Gandhi

Darwinians won’t fight either because they know they will lose. Their cowardice is legendary and I have proved it time and time again, one of my most gratifying accomplishments.

By the way, does anyone here know who runs the Phylointelligence blog? When a new Darwinian blog appears without a leader, that constitutes the bottom of the intellectual and ethical barrel. I’ll bet it is well known among Darwinians and I am confident they will never let me know.

“Birds of a feather flock together.”
Cervantes

I asked “Phylointellect” who he was but he chooses to remain unkown.

It doesn’t get any better than this, but it DOES, it DOES!

It is hard to believe isn’t it?

Not at all. It is a matter of record.

I love it so!

jadavison.wordpress.com

Reply
_________________________________________________________________________

followed immediately by –

Fred the Bulbous Squidge says: November 30, 2010 at 11:18 am

@Fluppy the Wonder Whelk

“The vast majority of academics are arrogant, atheist, left wing fanatics who openly despise the Judeo-Chrstian ethic.”

You see, when you type things like the above, you just sound like an idiot.

Reply
John A. Davison says: November 30, 2010 at 12:10 pm

Only to you and others like you. There are thousands of us who feel the same way. Institutions of higher learning have always been Meccas for the intellectual dregs of society. There was a time in the distant past when Harvard, Cambridge and Cornell were important centers for evolutionary science but that ended with the arrival of Ernst Mayr, Stephen Jay Gould, Richard Dawkins and William Provine, atheist Darwinian mystics all and not a real scientist in the lot. Scientists seek the Truth. Those four think they have already found it. So do the thousands of their rabidly loyal like minded disciples. Atheist inspired neo-Darwinism is a clear and present danger to the integrity of a free society. It always has been.

jadavison.wordpress.com

Reply

8. John A. Davison - November 30, 2010

Hopefully, the following will be the last comment I will send to “This Scientific Life” or to any other weblog at Scientopia.

Bob O’H says: November 30, 2010 at 1:18 pm

I believe John used to work in an institution of higher learning.

If the two of you wish to continue this discussion, that’s fine. But it’s gone beyond the point where it is interesting (and far beyond the point where it is informative).

Reply
Fred the Bulbous Squidge says: November 30, 2010 at 1:58 pm

Agreed Bob. I’ll say no more.

Reply

John A. Davison says: November 30, 2010 at 2:36 pm
Bob O’Hara

I will stop also if I can depart without being further insulted. I made that clear long ago, but it was not honored. Otherwise, I am prepared to continue and copy these proceedings to my weblog for as long as that may take. That precaution is in case this thread might magically disappear which would not surprise me in the least.

It was my half century in academe that made it possible for me to evaluate that venue as the danger it has always posed to the search for the truth. I suggest you read my essay “What it means to be an antiDarwinian at the University of Vermont.” You will find it in the right hand column under essays. The University of Vermont is typical in its arrogant insistence on the most ridiculous suggestion in the history of science, a scenario without a shred of evidence. The Darwinian hoax still reigns supreme, especially in the literature of the English speaking world.

jadavison.wordpress.com

9. G. Hitch - December 1, 2010

Dr. Davison,

I just read your “WHAT IT MEANS TO BE AN ANTIDARWINIAN AT THE UNIVERSITY OF VERMONT”.
First time I’d heard of it!

I must say that this is a travesty indeed and I am very sorry for what you’ve gone through.

I’ve been both sorry and very angry for others as well, like Richard Sternberg et al. who’ve tasted what Gould described: “The scientific establishment bears a grisly resemblance to the Spanish Inquisition. Either you accept the rules and attitudes and beliefs promulgated by the ‘papacy’ (for which read, perhaps, the Royal Society or the Royal College of Physicians), or face a dreadful retribution. We will not actually burn you at the stake, because that sanction, unhappily, is now no longer available under our milksop laws. But we will make damned sure that you are a dead duck in our trade.” (Gould, D.W., “Letting poetry loose in the laboratory,” New Scientist, 29 August 1992, p.51)

Worse is that nothing has really changed, generally speaking anyway, in academia since you wrote that. If anything its intensified in most regions.

They are getting desperate!

Sadly, the atheists/Darwieners still hold sway and do as they please with impunity. Punitive measures will come though, and will come very hard.

When the noisy, rusted, fetid and malfunctioning Darwinian engine leaks enough lubricant and loses enough parts to seize it up completely, the undoing of Darwinism around the world will be a blessing to the rest of humanity for centuries!

The tragically -but funniest- thing in the world is that these professional imbeciles call themselves “free” thinkers!
And this all while inhibiting and censoring any thought but that which conforms to their own. Inane drone “logic” (if I may abuse the word) & perpetual cognitive dissonance are theirs.

Amazing is the duplicity of the atheist/Darwhiner, certifiable nut cases (I give you the likes of PZ Myers et al.) running and ruining universities across the globe these days.

At http://phylointelligence.org -a site that you’d mentioned here- I posted a rebuking response to one of their thick headed claims.

Of course, they didn’t publish it.

Not that’s free thinking for ya!

Keep up the good work.

10. John A. Davison - December 1, 2010

Gary Hitch

Thank you for the support.

Unfortunately, there is very little traffic here. The place to expose these people is on their own blogs. The problem is they are terrified of exposure so they continue denying that they have critics as you and I have each demonstrated for “Phylointelligence.” All I can suggest is to try to find weblogs willing to publish your thoughts. If you examine my recent messages here you will discover places where I have been able to speak. You must know of other places as well. The most important thing is to never hide your identity as it renders everything you may say meaningless.

The best way to expose an adversary is with his own words and deeds. Quote verbatim and cite the sources of his silly propositions, his hateful language, his cowardice when he muzzles you. Advertise their methods wherever you can. Sooner or later they will all crumble and fall as tyrants always have.

“Phylointelligence” is especially vulnerable as “phylointellect” refuses to identify himself. He is obviously very insecure. That such a blog even exists is a revealing disgrace.

There seems to be general consensus within the “Darwiniana” that I am some kind of mental case. What is needed is action from those who have a better reputation.

“Carry the battle to them. Don’t let them bring it to you. Put them on the defensive. And don’t ever apologize for anything .”
Harry S. Truman

11. John A. Davison - December 29, 2010

http://pandasthumb.org/archives/2010/12/denisova-genome.html#more

This report is interesting and supports my contention that one or more Neanderthal females were the direct ancestors for H. sapiens females which then bred with Neanderthal males with their inbreeding progeny producing the expected Mendelian ratio of 1 Neanderthal: 2 hybrids: 1 H. sapiens, with the Neanderthals subsequently becoming extinct. There is no reason to assume that H. sapiens came out of Africa. We were probably produced directly in Europe from Neanderthal females producing H. sapiens females semi-meiotically in a single step as I have proposed. Why African H. sapiens do not exhibit Neanderthal genes remains a mystery and may mean that they had a different immediate hominid ancestor. Alternatively certain genes may be silenced. The nice thing about the Prescribed Evolutionary Hypothesis (PEH) is that it can accomodate a number of different scenarios for the production of H. sapiens from hominid ancestors which do not have all to be the same species. Indeed it is difficult to understand how that must not have been the case for the present races of man.

In any event, I am convinced that we were not produced through sexual (Mendelian) means nor were any other true animal species. Sexual (Mendelian) reproduction is much too conservative to account for the diversity which characterizes the living world. It can only produce intraspecific varieties and subspecies, none of which are incipient species.

One thing is certain. Evolution required (past tense) reproductive continuity, and proposals that do not recognize that requisite must be discarded. I am not prepared to accept “Special Creation” for ourselves or for any other creature, extant or extinct. That does not mean that our appearance was not planned.

12. John A. Davison - January 1, 2011

I just left an important message at the following blog –

http://sophronismos.wordpress.com/2010/12/01/causal-incomprehension/#comments

Here it is –

on 1 January 2011 at 6:48 am | Reply John A. Davison

I am a great fan of Albert Einstein and agree with his lifelong determinism –

“EVERYTHING is determined… by forces over which we have no control.” (my emphasis)

My Prescribed Evolutionary Hypothesis PEH), derives directly from that foundation. All tangible evdence favors a planned phylogeny which has reached its climax and is no longer in progress. There has never been a role for chance in either ontogeny or phylogeny exactly as Leo Berg declared in 1922 –

“Neither in the one nor in the other is there room for chance.”
Nomogenesis, page 134

The entire development of the individual from the egg results from the controlled release of information altready present in the egg with no role for the environment beyond supplying the necessary milieu allowing that process to take place. I, with others, have postulated that must have been true for evolution as well.

Unfortunatey, the ruling Darwinian establishment has always assumed that the mechanism for organic evolution was understood with Natural Selection serving as the arbiter for what will survive and what will not with favorable changes gradually building the biota of the past and present. Nothing could be further from the truth. The sole purpose of natural selection has always been the same. It is to prevent change and maintain the status quo for as long as possible, a sequence which, with very few exceptions, has always ended in extinction. Again, Leo Berg properly identified the role of natural selection in phylogenesis –

“The struggle for existence and natural selection are not progressive agencies, but being , on the contrary, conservative, maintain the standard.”
Nomogenesis, page 406.

NeoDarwnism has proven to be the most enduring hoax in the history of science. It has survived for one reason only. It is the only acceptable thesis for the atheist mindset. As such it has seriously impaired progress in evolutionary science. That such a doctrine still survives is the greatest scandal in the history of biological science, receiving no support from either the fossil record or the experimental laboratory.

The truth lies elsewhere in a scenario planned from beginning to end, one which, as nearly as we can tell, is now finished with the present biota. Only extinction remains and is already in progress without a single verified replacement.

These facts have led me to the following summary.

“A past evolution is undeniable, a present evolution undemonstrable.”

jadavison.wordpress.com

13. John A. Davison - January 2, 2011

I submitted the following message to talkreason.org

In the interest of a balanced discussion I recommend that you refer your audience to my webpage – jadavison.wordpress.com – to my peer reviewed publications which you can find there – to my book “Unpublished Evolution Papers of John A. Davison, Lulu publshers and to my ongoing discussion of the twin mysteries of ontogeny and phylogeny. With Robert Broom, I believe that organic evolution was planned. I further propose that the plan reached its climax with the present biota which is now in permanent decline with extinction without replacement.

In short –

“A past evolution is undeniable, a present evolution undemonstrable.”

You have my permission to present this as a letter.

I have answered your security question.
___________________________________________

My first attempt failed because they claimed I had not answered the security question which I most certainly had. Many blogs use such means to inhibit comments from appearing. Why would a security question even be required to make a comment? Since this blog is rabidly anti Intelligent Design, I doubt my message will ever appear or even be acknowledged. That is why I reprint it here. If anyone knows who hosts this blog, please let me know. It is hard to deal with an unkown adversary, a defensive tactic I deplore. It indicates a profoundly insecure character which every Darwinian mystic most surely must have. Why else would they shroud their identity? Apparently the sole purpose of talkreason.org is to desecrate any person or group which believes in a purposeful universe.

Henceforth I will copy on this weblog all my attempts to communicate with those who believe they already know the means by which the living world came to be and to become. They haven’t even scratched the surface of that great mystery.

14. John A. Davison - January 3, 2011

http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2011/01/how_to_cover_doomsayers.php#comments

Here is Pee Zee Myers denigrating doomsayers. Since I am one myself, why doesn’t he go after me? I will tell you why. He is terrified to mention me, my sources, my weblog, my published papers and my book. That is why.

By way of clarification, if creative evolution is finished as I believe, doesn’t that make me a doomsayer? Furthermore, who is so out of touch with reality not to believe that we are destroying ourselves, our fellow creatures and our environment as never before in our history? So I am proud to be identified as a doomsayer.

As usual, Myers pontificates from on high, arrogant and absolute, leaving no room for dissent. His minions (his description of his followers) of course concur with their Fuhrer in lockstep Nazi fashion. They dare not do otherwise.

So let the record read that John A. Davison believes for very good reasons that the evolutionary Plan has been realized with the contemporary biota and that only extinction remains. Everything we know at present pleads for that forecast. I realize this seems a rather radical position and I challenge Paul Zachary Myers to attack and expose me as he attacks and exposes those sects who for their reasons predict the end of the world. Myers loves to abuse all religious groups and especially Catholics just like Dawkins does, but when a real scientist challenges their atheist dogma they both wilt like day lilies in a tornado. So does every other Darwinian I have ever known.

I will send this message to Myers et alia confident that he and they will pretend, as they always have, that we do not exist. Such has been their posture for a century and a half. Such cowardice has no parallel in the history of science. The longer they persist, the better I like it!

It doesn’t get any better than this.

15. John A. Davison - January 4, 2011

http://sophronismos.wordpress.com/2010/12/01/causal-incomprehension/#comment-3199

I am holding forth at the above blog and I welcome responses, pro or con, to my presentation. But will they appear? Judging from my history, probably not. We many critics of Darwinian mysticism still are not allowed to exist!

Below is my most recent message there –

on 4 January 2011 at 6:40 am | Reply John A. Davison

Neo-Darwinism is a threat to Western Civilization because it is an atheist inspired, intolerant dogma which attacks the very roots of the Judeo-Christian ethic. When Darwinists like Richard Dawkins can suggest that the Holy Father should be arrested the moment he sets foot on British soil and Pee Zee Myers finds it necessary to call him “bennie” and the President of the United States “asshole-in chief,” it is my contention that these persons are our enemies.

Incidentally, there is no compelling reason to insist on a single God any more than there is to claim a monophyletic evolution. God or Gods may even be dead as Nietzsche claimed, but to deny the past existence of such entities as the Darwinians all do is not acceptable. It is my contention that everything we see in the animate world is the result of the actions of an unkown number of “spiritual entities” which MUST HAVE existed in the distant past. Everything else is conjecture. To assume that it is intrinsic in the nature of matter to self-assemble into a living, evolving creature even once is naive and in direct conflict with experimental science. If that were possible, it would have been demonstrated in the laboratory long ago.

“It is undesirable to believe a proposition when there is no ground whatsoever for supposing it to be true.”
Bertrand Russell

I am not a philosopher and, like Einstein, I am unable to deal with that area. My conclusions are based on reality free of any philosophical construct.

“Upon reading books on philosophy, I learned that I stood there like a blind man in front of a painting…the works of speculative philosophy are beyond my reach.”
Alice Calaprice, The New Quotable Einstein, page 193.

I discuss this matter in greater depth in my book –

“Unpublished Evolution Papers of John A. Davison.” Lulu publishers

jadavison.wordpress.com

16. John A. Davison - January 7, 2011

In browsing “After the Bar Closes” this morning I discovered this revealing example of how Wesley Royce Elsberry deals with dissent.
__________________________________________________

Wesley R. Elsberry
Posts: 3432
Joined: May 2002
(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 07 2011,01:29

——————————————————————————–
Quote (brobotsb2 @ Jan. 06 2011,20:14)
you people really need to add comment moderation to your forum of BS…

Yeah, you wish. It is easy enough to delete your ravings and disable your unwanted accounts. How long does it take you to post? I guarantee it doesn’t take me that much effort to delete and de-privilege.

————–
“You can’t teach an old dogma new tricks.” – Dorothy Parker
__________________________________________________

Note his perennial signature, borrowed from Dorothy Parker, the perfect description of his own condition as a rigid, dogmatic Darwinian on the same intractable level with Paul Zachary Myers and Clinton Richard Dawkins.

He has described precisely the tactics used by himself, Myers and Dawkins. They all “delete and de-privilege.” That is all they know how to do when confronted by critics.

I am so pleased that Elsberry was stupid enough to expose himself in such a transparent fashion.

Congratulations Wesley, You are a Prince among men!

The trio of Elsberry, Dawkins and Myers constitute an “Axis of Evil” just as menacing to Western Civilization as was the Rome/Berlin/Tokyo Axis of World War II. They all sought power, what Henry Kissinger, one who sought power himself, called –

“POWER, THE ULTIMATE APHRODISIAC.”

It takes one to know one!

Enjoy your fleeting moments in the sun you pseudo-scientific charlatans with your armies of drooling, illiterate buffoons. You will soon join the ranks of all who have chosen to abandon science to carve a special place for themselves. The full support of Wikipedia, Google and a radical, atheist inspired “Intellectual Community” will not shield you from the Truth.

There is no place for those who must muzzle their adversaries and those who engage in such hideous tactics are fulfilling Thomas Henry Huxley’s warning –

“Science commits suicide when she adopts a creed.”

Heedless of Einstein’s summary –

“A doctrine which is unable to maintain itself in clear light, but only in the dark, will of necessity lose its effect on mankind with uncalculable harm to human progress,”

you all three go right on, trapped in your shared congenital ideology that we live in a purposeless world, mere accidents, the products of forces you already know to be true. If you had not all three deliberately made us your mortal enemies, we would feel sorry for you. Sadly, you have made that impossible and must now reap the crop that you have sown with the seeds of bigotry, intolerance and hate that have marked you as the enemies of Truth and Knowledge, goals that you can impede but cannot stop. I look forward to seeing you all pilloried by your peers, your certain fate as the enemies of science you have all three proven yourselves to be.

Enjoy yourselves, you pathetic enemies of the world you seek to destroy. It is very much later than you think.

It doesn’t get any better than this.

I love it so!

P.S. I emailed the above message addressed to Myers, Dawkins and Elsberry with copies to several others. Of course I have no guarantee that they even read my emails since I never evoke responses. Accordingly, I ask that those who share my evaluations to copy them, display them and send them to our mutual enemies as I have been doing for a long time. To date I see no sign of such activity. That is the only way we will prevail.

17. John A. Davison - January 8, 2011

I see my above harangue falls on deaf ears just like everything else I have produced. With neither friend nor foe, I exist in a vacuum, carrying on a monologue with myself. I guess that is what one must expect when one challenges the one true faith – organic evolution by accident, still the current consensus, as it has been throughout the last century and a half. Like Mivart, Osborn, Bateson, Berg, Broom, Schindewolf, Grasse, Goldschmidt, Lovtrup and DeHaan before him, Davison also does not exist. As one can learn from the writings of the prominent “evolutionists” of the past and present – Stephen Jay Gould, Ernst Mayr, Franciso Ayala, William Provine, Theodosius Dobzhansky, Ronald Fisher, J.B.S. Haldane, Sewell Wright, etc, etc, and of course the greatest “evolutionist” of them all – Clinton Richard Dawkins – none of us ever existed. Try to find us in their Bibliographies and Indexes. Try to find any critic of Darwin’s Victorian fantasy that is given any serious consideration at all. There are several meters of library shelving dedicated to Darwinian mysticism while most of the literature that has destroyed it can be found in a half dozen books by the greatest minds of the post Darwin era, not one of whom was a professional “evolutionist” himself. I’m sure not one. The mechanism of organic evolution remains a great mystery and those who think they already know its cause are fools destined to be exposed as such. The enormous consensus literature that identifies the Darwinian mindset is a house of cards which should have fallen in Darwin’s own day but has been kept erect by six generations of quasi-scientists utterly incapable of understanding the living world in which they found themselves.

It was one of the most prominent of their writers, Ernst Mayr, who best described their collective condition when he described himself on page 132 of “The Growth of Biological Thought” with a thought of his own –

“This may be true, but is not very convincing for a dyed-in-the-wool Darwinian like myself.”
I rest my case.

“dyed-in-the-wool” is the perfect synonym for “born that way,” or for that matter – “congenital.”

“Our actions should be based on the ever-present awareness that human beings in their thinking, feeling, and acting ARE NOT FREE but are just as causally bound as the stars in their motion.”
Alice Caparice, The New Quotable Einstein, page 200, my emphasis in caps.

Happy New Year!

18. John A. Davison - January 18, 2011

http://blog.robertringer.com/2010/10/07/dismiss-disparage-demonize/#comments

I got a lick in at the above blog and a second one is awaiting moderation. Robert Ringer strikes me as a rational voice in a crazy world.

19. John A. Davison - January 23, 2011

http://www.antievolution.org/cgi-bin/ikonboard/ikonboard.cgi?s=4d3c53194c95357e;act=ST;f=14;t=7201;st=120

The above thread is a typical example of the kind of drivel that goes on at Wesley Royce Elsberry’s precious “After The Bar Closes,” nothing but foul mouthed exchanges between cowardly, pseudonymous, nincompoops, terrified to reveal their identity.

Like Myers’ Pharyngula, and Dawkins’ richarddawkwins.net, Elsberry is also destroying his reputation by running a forum for congenital defectives utterly oblivious to the fact that by so doing he too is committing suicide to become the laughing stock of evolutionary science. Don’t take my word for it.

“Science commits suicide when she adopts a creed.”
Thomas Henry Huxley

Slow perhaps, but as certain as night follows day.

Ooooooooooooooooh, how sweet it is!
Jackie Gleason

“A child of five would understand this. Send someone to fetch a child of five.”
Groucho Marx

It doesn’t get any better than this. It simply can’t!

I love it so!

I emailed the above to the usual suspects and others, introducing it with –

“Hot off my weblog for your Sunday indigestion”

and terminating it with –

“In view of the fact that God limited the intelligence of man, it seems unfair that he did not also limit his stupidity.”
Konrad Adenauer, followed by CHEERS! in five colors!

_________________________________________________________________________________________

I feel much better now, having once again performed my duty as scientist and citizen to do everything in my power to make this world a better place for all of us and our posterity.

20. John A. Davison - January 23, 2011

http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2011/01/episode_clx_i_see_what_you_did.php#comments

The above thread is typical of a day at Pharyngula. Each day at some point Myers reminds his flock of the accumulated entries and comments, eleven thousand, seven hundred and thirty nine and one million, two hundred and fifty three thousand, three hundred and forty three respectively as of today. Tomorrow will be another, like all past days at Pharyngula, not one of which addressed the central problem of evolution – the mechanism by which it occurred (past tense). That question is never asked because the mechanism is already known. Natural selection has become the major force driving an atheist philosophy. It has always been misunderstood by the Darwinians as it is entirely anti-evolutionary as an objective analysis of both the fossil record and the contemporary living world has made obvious to the unimpaired observer.

Speaking of popularity, clearly Pee Zee’s obsession, let me remind him that Gregor Mendel’s 1868 paper, marking the birth of genetics, was cited only a handful of times over the thirty-two year period prior to its “discovery” in 1900. So much for popularity in science.

“The struggle for existence and natural selection are not progressive agencies, but being, on the contrary, conservative, maintain the standard.”
Leo Berg, Nomogenesis page 406

There now I feel much better.

21. John A. Davison - January 27, 2011

Here is my latest email sent to Pee Zee Myers and several others earlier today,

I see at Pharyngula that you are carrying on again with “I get email,” the perennial tactic you employ to deal with your carefully selected critics. When are you going to air the several emails you have received from me you cowardly little beer fart? I’ll look for it, supremely certain that you haven’t the guts to even mention my name. Neither do Elsberry nor Dawkins. You clowns keep right on pretending that Darwinism is settled science when the truth is that it’s a hoax and always has been.

War, God help me. I love it so!
General George S. Patton

So do I George!

John A. Davison, Professor Emeritus of Biology, University of Vermont. Mailing address: L4 Grandview Drive, South Burlington, VT 05403
email – nosivadaj@msn.com

weblog – http://www.jadavison

22. John A. Davison - January 27, 2011

http://www.fstdt.net/QuoteComment.aspx?QID=78627&Page=4

Be sure to visit this latreen also to witness first hand the depths to which atheist ideology can submerge the human character.

It is hard to believe isn’t it?

Not at all. It is a matter of record and it is beautiful!

P.S. They refused to print my last comment so I took the precaution of coying it before sending it. Here it is below.

Marion Rossendale?

Who is he? I can’t Google him. I’ll bet it’s a pseudonym. By the way, I am not elderly. I’m ancient. I’ll be 83 in June and ten times the scientist you creeps will ever be. You clowns are no different than the animals at Pharyngula, After The Bar Closes or any other Darwinian ghetto. They are all manned by potty mouthed, degenerate illiterates. You are all going down the tube with or without my help anyway so keep on behaving like you are, like you always have. Just remember that you are dealing with a real scientist and not some rabid little character assassin like Pee Zee Myers or a certifiable loony tune like Clinton Richard Dawkins or a cowardly lightweight like Wesley Royce Elsberry. I call that ensemble “The Three Stooges” of evolutionary science. There has never been a single valid contribution from any of those losers that clarifies the great mystery of evolution. They all have fallen for the biggest hoax ever perpetrated in the history of science, an evolution driven by natural selection. All natural selection ever did was to preserve the status quo for as long as possible, a tactic which with very few exceptions terminates with extinction.

“The struggle for existence and natural selection ARE NOT progressive agencies, but being, on the contrary, conservative, maintain the standard.”
Leo Berg. Nomogenesis, page 406, my emphasis

By the way ladies, creative evolution is a phenomenon of the distant past.
Buy my book. Get up to speed. Grow up. Of course you won’t because you already know all about the mechanism of evolution don’t you? Sure you do! Just remember –

“Davison is the Darwinian’s worst nightmare.”
Terry Trainor

I have asked my readers to definitely visit this pathetic blog in order to see first hand the lengths to which the Darwinians must go to preserve the idiotic assumption that evolution could proceed (past tense) without a plan, without a schedule and without an end in mind.

So keep right on doing what all the Darwinian bastions of lunacy have always done, denigrate your named adversaries from behind the armor of Darwinian mysticism and cowardly pseudonymy. It amuses me immensely to see you clowns behave the way you do. Just remember children –

“A man in armor is his armor’s slave.”
Robert Browning
_____________________________________________________________________________

P.S. I got a couple of more short licks in but they will probably be deleted. Deletion and banishment are the hallmarks of Darwinian blogs. Anyhow, be sure to visit this intellectual toilet bowl to see what we are up against.

23. John A. Davison - January 28, 2011

Below is my latest response to the cowardly creep that runs the above blog.

You drooling illiterate defective, you pseudonymous cowardly nobody, terrified that someone might find out your name and expose you as the foul-mouthed degenerate that you just proved yourself to be. Reveal your miserable self to me and the world at large so that we all will know how far down the scale of common decency this cesspool has fallen. You won’t do it because you are homozygous garbage, a blight upon the face of humanity and a despicable embarrassment to the world wide web.

jadavison.wordspress.com

________________________________________________

Be sure to visit this cesspool and if anyone knows who runs it, let me know so I can advertise for him. Whoever it is doesn’t even have a pseudonym. He’s just a voice without a body, a mere filthy-mouthed echo chamber. Isn’t the internet wonderful?

vmartin1 - January 29, 2011

I’ve got a lick as well. Some Autralian Uni teacher spreads darwinism around the internet. So I’ve left him a few words:

http://evolvingthoughts.net/2011/01/29/imagination-and-id/comment-page-1/#comment-35194

24. John A. Davison - January 29, 2011

Thank you Martin. I joined you there. Don’t give up. We have these creeps on the run. It is just a matter of time before they become nothing but an embarrassment to the history of evolutionary science. Darwinism remains what it has always been, the necessary posture of a congenital atheist mindset. The religious “Fundamentalista” are no better that the atheist “Darwinista” as I made very apparent on the link you provided.

25. John A. Davison - January 29, 2011

https://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=37148773&postID=8848323372832925183

I just left a devastating appraisal of the Darwinian paradigm on Larry Moran’s blog above. It will be interesting to see if he allows it to appear. I am betting he won’t or if it does appear it will be met with ridicule and denigration. Stay tuned and find out.
_______________________________________________________________________________

As of January 30, my “devastating appraisal of the Darwinian paradigm” has not appeared and probabaly won’t. I should have copied it before sending it.

So what else is new in a world still dominated by Darwinian mysticism? Incidentally Larry Moran is on record saying that Darwin was the greatest scientist that ever lived.

It is hard to believe isn’t it.

Not at all. It is a matter of record.

26. John A. Davison - January 30, 2011

Below is my terminal comment which I copied before I sent it because I knew the cowardly swine would never let it appear. This is at the evolving thoughts blog mentioned by my friend Martin. Be sure to visit that cesspool to see first hand the depths to which Darwinian mystics sink to defend the most absurd notion in the history of science.

I love it so!
___________________________________

The Other Jim, obviously another cowardly alias with a reading comprehension problem.

It is Dr. John A. Davison (since 1954) and I don’t have a flock like Paul Zachary Myers, Wesley Royce Elsberrry and Clinton Richard Dawkins, The Three Stooges of evolutionary science, congenital atheists all, the essential requisite for all Darwinians. Not one of these clowns has even scratched the surface of the mechanism for either ontogeny or phylogeny because the poor souls are convinced they already know what it WAS. It isn’t even going on any more and those who imagine that it is are living in fantasy worlds. I see that this is just one more flame pit manned by cowardly mightabeen, couldabeen losers, terrified that someone might learn who they really are. What a disaster this blog really is, right up there with Pharyngula, Panda’s Thumb, After the Bar Closes and richarddawkins.net, nothing but therapy for sociopathic misfits whose only joy in life is abusing a real scientist who actually uses his real name, something most of you clowns would never do. You phonies amuse me with your stupid masochistic behavior. Don’t stop. I thrive on trash like you. Not only do I not have a flock I wouldn’t dream of having one. The jerks who run blogs with lots of fans need that armor to feed their insatiable egos. Myers, Dawkins, Elsberry, Moran, Dembski and every other blogczar, not one a real scientist and not one of these clowns has ever contributed a scintilla to the solution of the twin mysteries of ontogeny and phylogeny. It saps all their energy preserving the biggest hoax in the history of science. Dembski is trying desperately to force phylogeny into a Baptist, Biblical straightjacket while the rest of them devoutly believe they already have all the answers.

“A man in armor is his armor’s slave.”
Robert Browning

You don’t even have the common sense to banish me as I continue to expose you as the perfect bufoons you insist on displaying yourselves to be.

I doesn’t get any better than this.

I love it so!

jadavison wordpress.

27. John A. Davison - January 30, 2011

Below is a thigh slapper from Panda’s Thumb

http://pandasthumb.org/archives/2011/01/darwin-week.html#more

Imagine this. Darwin has a whole week dedicated to him. The man is a monumental embarrassment to British science. His remains should be removed from Westminster Abbey to find a resting place elsewhere, preferably in an unmarked grave.

28. John A. Davison - January 31, 2011

I just left the following message on John Wilkins’ little flame pit -Evolving thoughts.”

John Harshman whoever that is. I never heard of him.

The evidence for my thesis is overwhelming and most of it has been published in peer reviewed journals. Since I am no longer welcome to either the “Fundamentalista” or the “Darwinista”, both of which “groupthinks” I have rejected, I now present our science on my weblog – “Proceedings of the Natural History Society of South Burlington (Vermont).” a journal of which I am the Editor. It is modeled after the journal in which Gregor Mendel published his 1868 paper which marked the birth of Genetics. Mendel too knew that his work would not be accepted by the contemporary botanical journals of his day, so he did what I have now done and for the same reason. His journal – “Proceedings of The Natural History Society of Brunn (Austria),” of which he was an Editor, permitted him to present findings that would otherwise be unavailable to the scientific commmunity. I am doing exactly the same thing and for the same reason. All the derogation, insulting, deletion, banishment and pseudonymous cowardice that characterizes this blog and so many others, proves only what we have long known to be true.

“A doctrine which is unable to maintain itself in clear light, but only in the dark will of necessity lose its effect on mankind with uncalculable harm to human progress.”
Albert Einstein

I dare John Wilkins to allow this message to appear.

jadavison.wordpress.com

I also reminded Wilkins that I had copied the message on my weblog. I’m betting he will not allow it to appear. Just as Pee Zee Myers, Wesley Elsberry and Richard Dawkins have muzzled me, so will John Wilkins do the same. Scientists don’t shut down their adversaries, they counter them if they can. Our science has never been even acknowledged let alone criticized. We several real scientists are still not allowed to exist. Our adversaries are terrified of the truth – that they have dedicated their professional lives to a phantom.

It doesn’t get any better than this.

I love it so!

_____________________________________________________________________________________

Here below another one I just left there.

Thank you Gary Hitch and Martin Cadra for introducing a modicum of rationality on this Darwinian dog and pony show. It is refreshing to find others capable of offering constructive and deeply challenging commentary on the Darwinian fairy tale. Our reward will be banishment if we persist so I say let’s get on with it. Let Wilkins do what Myers, Dawkins, Elsberry and others did long ago. Let him also banish the critics of the Darwinian hoax. I am extremely proud to have been banished from more weblogs than any other real scientist in the history of the internet. I’ve even been banished three or four times (I can’t remember for sure) from Dembski’s Uncommon Descent. To be banished here will be just one more merit badge to pin on my white laboratory coat as the most effective critic of the Darwinian horror story presently still alive which at 83 will probably be not for much longer!

It doesn’t get any better than this.

jadavison.wordpress.com
___________________________________________________________________________-

Folowed by this.

Oh wonderful. Another Darwimp has arrived in the person of Robert O’Hara, perennial resident of Scientopia and After The Bar Closes, two more Alamos of Darwinian damn foolishness. This is even better than I could have imagined. I attract devout worshippers of the Great God Chance like meat attracts flies. They follow me around anxious to add their insults to the others I invariably evoke. Thank you Bob O’H. Incidentally, I dedicated an essay “An Essay on Insults” to Bob along with Mark Chiu-Carroll and Paul Zachary Myers two of the most disgusting character assassins I have ever encountered. You can find it on the “new essays” button on the top of my web page. Be sure to enjoy it along with all the other material you will find there.

Who is next? Don’t stop. Where is Alan Fox? He is usually first in line to ridicule me, usually by referring to my age. Pile on folks. I’ll be disappointed if you don’t.

Don’t tell me there is no God. He has delivered you into my hands!

jadavison.wordpress.com

____________________________________________________________________________

I am having a ball folks and I hope you will all go to Wilkins’ weblog to add your opinions as others are doing.

It really doesn’t get any better than this. It can’t!
___________________________________________________________________________________________

P.S.

John Wilkins finally banished me as I knew he would, but not before he exposed himself as the loser he is and always will be. Gary Hitch and Martin Cadra are still alive there and sooner or later Wilkins will banish them too if they continue to expose him as the intellectual disaster he has always been. These Darwinian defectives always end up banishing their critics if the critics persist. That is the mark of the non-scientist every time it happens. I thank Gary Hitch and Martin Cadra for their support.

29. John A. Davison - January 31, 2011

Here is another message I left, this time at This Scientific Life, Bob O’Hara’s blog at Scientopia. I copied it because I figured it might not appear. I was right. It didn’t. As usual, the Darwinian zealots banish their critics as they always have and always will until they are finally defeated which should have taken place in Darwin’s own time. So “this scientific life” has now joined with all the other blogs on both sides of the perennial debate nearly all of which have banished us from their so-called forums which are nothing but closed union shops in which honest dissent is inconceivable. Below is the message they were afraid to present.
___________________________________________________________________________________________

Well I guess I failed to shut down this dog and pony show. But look who still is active. The same old denizens of Scientopia, After The Bar Closes, Panda’s Thumb and Pharyngula, Darwinian bastions all. Darwinism is finished thank God or Gods for that. It now survives only on the internet as it died long ago with the publications of my sources who without exception delivered death blows to every aspect of Darwin’s infantile fantasy. Atheist Darwinism keeps rising like the Sphinx from its own ashes as the only conceivable position for the congenital atheist mentality which lies at the root of the Darwinian paradigm. The Darwinian rejects not only a living God but past God or Gods as well. No true scientist has ever taken that position and I defy anyone to name one who did. Stated simply, Darwinians are not scientists. They are victims of a congenital deficiency disease for which no cure is available. They are incompetent even to imagine that there might be a purpose in the universe. We should really feel sorry for them and shun them as the incurable intellectual lepers they have proven to be. All they can do is lash out at those who, not so impaired, understand that the world in which we find ourselves could never have been produced by chance.

Thanks for allowing me to speak. Now please continue with the denigration of a real scientist. He loves being treated with contempt as it only defines the abuser not the abusee. This blog has plenty of the former like every other Darwinian ghetto I have ever encountered. Don’t disappoint me.

It doesn’t get any better than this.

jdadavison.wordpress.com

_____________________________________________________________________________

And so it goes. Now that I am no longer able to respond, the insults, as usual, continue. What really amuses me is the way they think I regard myself as a martyr. Nothing is further from the truth. It is the Darwinian who is the martyr, blindly sacrificing his reputation by supporting the most ridiculous proposal in the history of biological science – that chance coupled with natural selection produced millions of years of an ascending, self-limiting phylogeny which, as near as we can ascertain, reached its climax some time ago with the terminal product – Homo sapiens. Leo Berg, in 1922, long before Molecular Biology proved him correct, had this to say about the twin mysteries of ontogeny and phylogeny, development and evolution respectively –

“Neither in the one nor in the other is there room for chance.”
Nomogenesis, page 134

“Never in the field of human conflict was so little owed to so many by so many.”
after Winson Churchill

It doesn’t get any better than this. It can’t!

War, God help me, I love it so!
General George S. Patton

So do I General Patton. So do I!

30. John A. Davison - February 2, 2011

Below is my latest contribution to “This scientific life” over at Scientopia. It appeared but I copied it anyway because comments have a way of disappearing when they don’t conform with the prevailing dogma. This one sure doesn’t

John A. Davison says: 2 February 2011 at 00:26 I love it when Darwinian masochists insist on displaying their position in such indelible fashion. Your silly science is dead as a hammer and always has been. It is nothing more than 152 years of mass hysteria which will ensure the demise of every single scientist who was dumb enough to use his real name when supporting it. That explains why the vast majority of the denizens of the Darwinian ghettos of Pharyngula, Panda’s Thumb, EvC, After The Bar Closes and richarddawkins.net are all using phony handles. They must know they are all wrong or they would affix their real names to their nasty comments like their hero Paul Zachary Myers does. Myers is hell bent on his own destruction and doing a masterful job of ensuring it.

jadavison.wordpress.com

________________________________________________________________________

I forwarded this message to Paul Zachary Myers, Clinton Richard Dawkins and Wesley Royce Elsberry, the “Three Stooges” of Darwinian mysticism, with copies to other parties interested in the biggest hoax in the history of science.

31. John A. Davison - February 2, 2011

I just left this message on
“This Scientific Life” over at Scientopia. I copied it here in case grrlScientist or her husband Bob O’Hara decide to delete it. Note that she thinks I am a nut. So does Bob O’Hara. That suits me just fine. To be regarded as a nut by that pair is a compliment.

————————————-

I take it that grrlScientist, aka Devorah Bennu, regards me as a nut? Thank you grrlScientist. I will made a note of that. Your husband Bob O’Hara says the same thing. Bless you both.

I stand by what I have presented here as an accurate description of what Darwinism has always been – a myth, a fairy tale without a shred of validity. It’s cornerstone, natural selection, is entirely anti-evolutionary, serving only to preserve the species unchanged for as along as possible, a strategy that for the vast majority of all organisms has led to their extinction. EVERYTHING that the Darwinian believes is wrong, dead wrong, just as wrong as the are the beliefs of the religious fanatics. Darwinians themselves are religious fanatics, with Darwin their God and all kinds of patron saints like Ernst Mayr , Stephen Jay Gould, William Provine, Clinton Richard Dawkins and of course the great character assassin Paul Zachary Myers. These people are not scientists and never were. They are a disgrace to biological science, blind as bats to the world in which they fnd themselves. Their altar is a roulette wheel flanked by a pair of fuzzy dice. Creative evolution is finished and it never did involve natural selection, Mendelian segregation and recombination, population genetics, genetic drift, statistics, allelic mutation or any other aspect of obligatory sexual reproduction. If those devices could produce new species, genera or any of the higher categories it would have been demonstrated experimentally long ago. There hasn’t been a new Genus in two million years and not a new species in historic times. All of phylogeny was planned in advance from beginning to end and the end could come any time now. The Darwinian lives in a fantasy world, hamstrung and paralyzed by his congenital atheism, Richard Dawkins being the perfect example. The Darwinian is utterly incompetent, unable even to image that evolution WAS a guided process as I and others are convinced it must have been. It isn’t even going on any more. All we can document is extinction.

There is nothing to discuss, nothing to debate and no room for argument. Scientopia, like all the other Darwinian “groupthinks,” is a flaming disaster, contributing absolutely nothing to our understanding of the closely related mysteries of phylogeny and ontogeny.

Neither in the one nor in the other is there room for chance.
Leo Berg , Nomogenesis, page 134

Both processes always proceeded on the basis of information already present. “Something” or “somethings” put that information there as any fool can see.

“A child of five would understand this. Send someone to fetch a child of five.”
Groucho Marx

All you people can do is insult those who disagree with you. You offer nothing yourselves and never have. Your precious Darwinism is already dead, destroyed by the testimony of the fossil record and the experimental laboratory. It is the most persistent hoax in the history of science and is finally being abandoned as nothing but a product of the human imagination. How anyone can still believe any of it is incomprehensible to me as it is to many others.

jadavison.wordpress.com

——————————————————————————-

The above message was deleted and I have been banished from “This scientific life,” the proof of the bigotry that characterizes every Darwinian so-called “forum” I have ever encountered. It is a good thing I copied it don’t you agree? grrlScientist was upset that I attacked her on her turf. Where else would one go after an adversary?

Scientopia is no different from Pharyngula, After The Bar Closes, Panda’s Thumb, EvC, Sandwalk, you name them, they are all the same.

32. John A. Davison - February 2, 2011

Here is all it takes to be banished. All you have to do is claim that your adversary is monumentally ignorant of the enormous literature that renders everything he believes dead wrong. It works every time and I heartily recommend it. There is only one thing more telling than banishment. It is being ignored. Larry Moran pretends I’m not there at all. That has been the standard Darwinian response ever since Darwin. John Wilkins, like Pee Zee Myers, Wesley Elsberry and whoever runs richarddawkins.net, Uncommon Descent and EvC is a banisher. Those are the only two kinds of egomaniacal blowhards of which I am aware. Both sorts are panic stricken, power crazed losers who have to resort to such tactics in order to survive. Real scientists don’t ban their adversaries. They don’t even argue with them. There is nothing to argue about. There isn’t even very much to discuss. The truth always surfaces on its own, or as Oscar Wilde put it –

“If you tell the truth, you can be certain, sooner or later, to be found out.”

One thing I’ve learned: you can’t reason with either an atheist Darwinian or a religious fanatic. Their armor cannot be penetrated. It is impossible as they were “born that way.” I know that doesn’t sound right but it has been proven beyond any doubt by studies on separated monozygotic (identical) twins reared in drastically different social environments. I recommend “Born That Way” by William Wright.

“A man in armor is his armor’s slave.”
Robert Browning

“You can’t make chicken salad out of guano.”
anonymous

33. John A. Davison - February 6, 2011

The above message, #352, like several previous, was emailed to Pee Zee Myers, Richard Dawkins and Wesley Elsberry with copies to several others. To date I have received not a single acknowledgement from Myers, Dawkins or Elsberry that my messages have been received, yet every message has gone through and I know that my secondary emails have succeeded in reaching their named recipients. In other words, the “Three Stooges of Evolutionary Science” continue to play the same game that has prevailed throughout the last 152 years. They pretend that they have no credible critics, that Pierre Grasse, Richard B. Goldschmidt, Robert Broom, William Bateson, Leo Berg. Reginald C. Punnett, Otto Schindewolf, Henry F. Osborn and all the others on whose science my own securely rests – NEVER EXISTED AND STILL DO NOT EXIST.

I now can state with absolute confidence that Darwinism is the greatest, the most persistent and most revealing scandal in the history of biological science. Never before has the scientific community been treated with such overt contempt, with such arrogance and hide bound bigotry. I have conducted an experiment and the experiment has been successful.

We can now state with certainty that the radical elements which neo-Darwinism represents are intellectual terrorists whose goal is to overwhelm science with a lie, a world view that denies a purposeful universe and that prevents the free exchange of ideas which has always been the hallmark of scientific progress. The Truth is being stifled for what can only be political reasons. The goal of these Darwinian zealots is now transparent. They seek to replace an open society with a tyrannical social structure dominated by Universal Atheism, the antithesis of the Judeo-Christian ethic which served to create Western Civiization. We are no longer faced only with our traditional opponents of Fascism and Communism. These Godless philosophies have now invaded science itself to poison its efforts at the roots. The tyrannical hold that these three in particular have firmly established constitutes a clear and present danger to our society by poisoning our youth with the same zeal with which Adolf Hitler poisoned the young men and women of Nazi Germany with the Hitlerjugend propaganda of the 1930s.

I hope that this may serve as a wake up call for others to join in exposing atheist inspired Darwinism for what it has always been – the enemy of science and accordingly of Western Civilization. These practitioners of hate speech deserve all the attention they have earned. They have contributed nothing of value to the search for the Truth and done much to deter it.

This message, like several previous, will also be transmitted via email to the approriate destinations with copies to others proving that they have been sent.

34. G. Hitch - February 6, 2011

@353
That is one excellent summary of the current Darwinian institution.

I only wish all the other scientists, science philosophers, intelligent journalists (are there any left?), etc. would stop cowering in fear in their dark corners, afraid to speak up lest they lose their jobs, positions, reputations and of course $.

Nevertheless, I can’t help but sympathize with many of such. Look what the Darwieners did to R. Sternberg, a man with 2 Ph.D’s in evolutionary biology, just for publishing one small paper that put doubts on the Darwinian mechanism.

Donald William Gould got it right when he described the true nature of the scientific “community”, “The scientific establishment bears a grisly resemblance to the Spanish Inquisition. Either you accept the rules and attitudes and beliefs promulgated by the ‘papacy’ (for which read, perhaps, the Royal Society or the Royal College of Physicians), or face a dreadful retribution. We will not actually burn you at the stake, because that sanction, unhappily, is now no longer available under our milksop laws. But we will make damned sure that you are a dead duck in our trade.” (Gould, D.W., “Letting poetry loose in the laboratory,” New Scientist, 29 August 1992)

How’s that for free scientific inquiry?!

Patent fools like those at the above noted blogs (PZ, BO, RD et al.) are actually proud of this!

You can’t get any further from real science than that.

35. John A. Davison - February 6, 2011

Gary Hitch

You are right. Many of the Darwinista realize that it has already caught up with them. Look at Myers over at Pharyngula. He is like a fart on a griddle. He is so uptight that it damn near killed him recently. At the rate he’s going he will never see sixty. Bob O’Hara is an illiterate masochist and doesn’t have enough sense to realize it. grrlScientist is too. I have preserved their responses to me by copying everything before I send my messages and then recording their responses as well.

Every defective human being does himself in all by himself. The important thing is to make it a matter of record. Their words are their enemy and their epitaph.

Richard Dawkins is another matter altogether. The man actually believes what he says and he gets progressively worse with each passing day. I honestly think he is severely unbalanced. When his artificial world collapses around him, and it will, I don’t believe he will be able to cope with it.

They are all immune to reason. I love evoking their vitriol because it is not me they are attacking. They are attacking the best biologists of the last 150 years every one of whom rejected Darwin’s day dream. Alfred Russel Wallace, who co-authored the natural selection fairy tale, abandoned it even before the beginning of the 20th century. The whole history of Darwinism is a ghastly nightmare which proves beyond any doubt that we are not intellectually free but are born the way we will become. A high percentage of human beings are natural born losers and there is absolutely nothing that be done either for or to them.

The best way to deal with any intellectual adversary is to quote him verbatim as often as possible and always cite the source chapter and verse. I strongly recommend it.

Thanks for the support over at John Wilkin’s latrine. Of course I was, in his words, “pissing on his carpet.” He was pissing on himself and his shabby carpet. I have never been house broken and hopefully never will be.

“Carry the battle to them. Don’t let them bring it to you. Put them on the defensive. And don’t ever apologize for anything.”
Harry S. Truman

Keep the pressure on them.

P.S. This message will also be sent to the Myers/Elsberry/Dawkns Unholy Alliance

36. davescot - February 6, 2011

Hi John,

No doubt the metrosexual chu-carrol (chu is his bride’s last name) insulted me as well. Insults are the only arrows he has in his quivering quiver. I didn’t go back to look at any of his replies. Nothing he’s ever had to say was worth the time it took to read it.

Best,
Dave

37. John A. Davison - February 6, 2011

I bring out the best in all of them. John Wilkins just banished me for “pissing on his carpet.” Of course I “pissed” on his carpet. He’s been pissing on it himself and all over himself in the process. I never claimed to be house broken.

Chu-Carroll runs Scientopia and it is a total disaster, just a miniature Pharyngula embellished with filthy language.

I love it so!

“He who establishes his argument by noise and command, shows that his reason is weak.”
Montaigne

38. John A. Davison - February 13, 2011

This is for all you Darwin fans out there.

http://www.zoology.siu.edu/bobbleheadcheckorder.html

The above link will take you to where you can buy a Darwin Bobblehead. I understand they are selling like hotcakes.

I love it so!

39. G. Hitch - February 13, 2011

Funny
Can these bobbleheads be trusted? 😉

Still it would be fun have one on ones desk to whack the head whenever you hear yet another Darwinian fundamentalist claiming Darwinism is as proven as gravity.
lol


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: