All I claim is that evidence of Darwin's dishonesty is just part of the evidence against "the theory of evolution".What about Newton's dishonesty? Is that evidence against "the theory of gravity?" See, BETRAYERS OF THE TRUTH by William Broad and Nicholas Wade, Simon and Schuster, New York, p. 27-28 on Newton, or see Science, Feb. 23, 1973, "Newton and the Fudge Factor" by Richard S. Westfall, in which it is proven that Newton fudged his figures to make them come out to an exactitude and precision that "proved" this hypotheses correct, but such exactitude and precision was absent from his original sources.
The authors of BETRAYERS OF THE TRUTH also pointed out that "Newton's willingness to resort to sleight of hand is evident in more than just falsification of data. He used his position as president of the Royal Society, England's premier scientific club, to wage his battle with Leibniz over who first invented calculus. What was shameful about Newton's behavior was the hypocrisy with which he paid lip service to fair procedure but followed the very opposite course. It would be an inquitious judge "who would admit anyone was a witness in his own cause," announced the preface of a Royal Society report of 1712 which examined the question of priority in calculus. Ostensibly the work of a committee or impartial scientists, the reports was a complete vindication of Newton's claims and even accused Leibniz of plagiary. In fact, the whole report, sanctimonious preface included, had been written by Newton himself. Historians now believe that Leibniz' invention of calculus was made independantly of Newton."
See also the article "Newton's Debt to Cudworth" by Danton B. Sailor in Journal of the History of Ideas, 1988, which proves that Newton borrowed a theory of the origins of atomism from a Cambridge Platonist, Ralph Cudworth, instead of turning to Nature for truth as Newton made people think he did.
Not to mention the fact that numerous works on Newton's life and religion, including NEVER AT REST by Richard S. Westfall (Cambridge Univ. Press), LET NEWTON BE! ed. by John Fauvel, et al. (Oxford Univ. Press), IN THE PRESENCE OF THE CREATOR: ISSAC NEWTON AND HIS TIMES by Gale E. Christianson (The Free Press), ISAAC NEWTON: THE LAST SORCERER by Michael White (Fourth Estate), THE RELIGION OF ISAAC NEWTON by Frank E. Manuel (Oxford Univ. Press), ESSAYS ON THE CONTEXT, NATURE, AND INFLUENCE OF ISAAC NEWTON'S THEOLOGY by James E. Force and Richard H. Popkin (Kluwer Academic Pub.), all show that Newton was not an orthodox Christian, shunned taking Holy Orders which was de riguer for all other professors at the university where he taught, loved Arius / hated Athanasius, and also that Newton shunned his family and their tightly held Christian values, and also that he suffered manic-depression and had a horrible personalty and was quite vindictive.
I imagine that geocentrist creationist Christians have quite a field day with Newton, since geocentrists don't like gravity as it is currently understood. To them science has been going down hill since the Copernican Revolution.
RELATED ARTICLES
Intelligent Design (I.D.) and Isaac Newton
On the randomness of the natural world, life vs. death, and Isaac Newton's spiritual beliefs.Newton and Darwin and Wallace and "false analogies"
On Darwin, Isaac Newton, their theories, and whether or not Darwin was dishonest.Are miracles more falsifiable than neo-darwinism?
Newton himself allowed that perturbations in planetary orbits could be 'fixed' by the hand of God. But in the end, nothing came of that theory.Biblical Astronomy
Once Newton came along with his laws of gravity, you could explain why planets move in ellipses, how the Moon moves around the Earth, and why apples fall. 'Biblical astronomers' feel the need to 'point out flaws' in modern scientific evidence in light of 'what Scripture tells us.' Controversies surrounding Biblical Cosmology and Age of the Earth.How the moon formed
Includes animated re-creation of how the moon (according to one theory) likely formed. [All matter has gravity, and given millions of years, a cloud of dust particles can form a sphere.] Includes other theories which have been proposed to explain the formation of the moon.Muddlers of Science
Fictitional theories of 1945, about atomic particles and Physics.
Article last updated October 22, 2005
Certified error free by http://htmlvalidator.com
 |
 |