Reclaiming Science from Darwinism: A Clear Understanding of Creation, Evolution, and Intelligent Design

by Kenneth Poppe, William A. Dembski

William Dembski, PhD. Darwinism is a 150–year–old icon that has been propped up by unproven suppositions. The scientific discoveries of the last few decades are now kicking out the props. Dr. Kenneth Poppe is convinced the icon is ready to topple. Providing extensive scientific evidence of Darwinism’s failures, this career biology instructor uses enlightening analogies and examples to explain the theory’s Spiced with humor and helpful graphics, this popularly targeted text shows readers that—in regard to objections to evolution— the science is truly there. A superior resource for students, parents, and private– or public–school educators.

Genres: Intelligent Design

320 pages, Paperback

First published September 1, 2006

Reviews

[MaryEllen Elizabeth Hart · Rating 5 out of 5]

Great balance between Science and religion.

[Irene · Rating 4 out of 5]

this book helps me understand scientifically why the theory of Darwinism should be debunked.

[Lauren · Rating 1 out of 5]

Wow. Just wow. There is literally no one in the world I would recommend this to. It is too terminology and science heavy for lay people (as evidenced by my library copy having a few lines underlined through the first few chapters, before that eager devotee bailed.) Actual scientists will be baffled by the slew of bad science. At best it's incomplete. At worst it is an outright lie. There were maybe three chapters where the science was vaguely functional. In two, the facts are already outdated in places, and in the third, well, even though I agreed with him, it was so badly written that I actually wouldn't have been moved to believe it if I didn't know and trust in facts from outside sources.

His referencing is abysmal. He often quotes ID folks who are themselves perfect examples of twisting and ignoring bits of science until you have what you want. My favorite though is when he makes broad statements, like microbiologists and molecular biologists don't believe in "Darwinism" anymore because of reasons. Who are these people? How vast are their numbers? I've certainly never met any of them at all, much less in the large numbers he alludes to. And no, they're not hiding because people are mean. Scientists argue basic scientific ideas all the time, including evolution, and if you have a good idea to share they gobble it up, chew it over and try it out. There's still plenty of room for such discussion in science and evolution.

What I think I can boil it down to, is that anyone who can honestly refer to evolutionists as "Darwinists" is being purposefully maladroit. Evolution is so far beyond those first ideas of Darwin, it's humorous. Yes, we still talk about Darwin, but we've got better, bigger ideas now. It's like calling all Christians followers of John. Things have, dare I say it, evolved from the times of John the Baptist preaching to the masses.

For the record, I'm not a Christian, but I also suspect some great power driving evolution and life on Earth. How aware it is, we may never know. I picked this book up thinking it would be an interesting discussion about holes in our understanding of evolution (yes, they exist), but despite my love of science, willingness to be wowed, and interest in the topic, I found the author not only unpersuasive, but simply bad at legitimate research, and a boring writer. I suspect, from the way he writes, that he is a better speaker, but the fact that he teaches this level of science ignorance to students is troublesome.

[Gary L.]

A career science teacher, Poppe is probably written off by many as "not a real scientist", but his experience of science "where the rubber meets the road" makes him much less credulous than some whose specialties won't let them see the forest for the trees.
He makes a convincing case for the problem of there being too little time since the Big Bank for chance and luck to form even a simple protein without guidance, much less a complicated organism like a human being.
Committed Darwinists may scoff, but the onus is on them to demonstrate with more than paintings of dinosaurs and cavemen how, technically, those hundreds of thousands of genetic changes came about, without resorting to Lamarckian "just-so stories".