Refuting Evolution 2

by Jonathan Sarfati

Book Overview

Updated in 2011! Dr. Jonathan Sarfati, who expertly defended creation in Refuting Evolution (which has sold over 350,000 copies), goes to bat once again in Refuting Evolution 2. Aimed specifically at... This description may be from another edition of this product.

• Format: Paperback
• Language: English
• ISBN: 0890513872
• ISBN13: 9780890513873
• Release Date: May 2011
• Publisher: Master Books
• Length: 235 Pages
• Weight: 0.50 lbs.
• Dimensions: 0.6" x 5.4" x 8.4"

Customer Reviews

One of the best refutations of Darwinism

Sarfati's books are concise, clear, and at no time do they compromise principles in the way that proponents of ID do. I always knew that Darwinism was somehow wrong, but -- not being a scientist or some other kind of expert -- I couldn't say what exactly bothered me about it. This meant that the Darwinists could always win their arguments by resorting to "consensus" and accusing those who disagreed with them of being primitive. It took reading James Perloff's and Jonathan Sarfati's succinct and well-articulated books to give me the tools to counter Darwinism from a position of confidence based on knowledge and clearly articulated principles.

Brilliant!

Jonathan Sarfati wrote this book to specifically refute some of the claims made by Scientific American, and PBS TV. There are three sections corresponding to three claims, and the chapters in the sections are rebuttals of specific arguments. He is very systematic and logical, as a national chess champion is apt to be. He quotes the claim made for evolution or against creationism, and then step by step refutes it. He also has an appendix listing several arguments that creationists use, that are invalid. If we are going to defend our position, we must get our facts straight! I enjoyed the book very much. I learned a lot about science and biology, which is usually hard for me to study. Sarfati points out that just because you can demonstrate that micro-evolution occurs, that doesn't prove macro-evolution. The fact that the fittest animals survive doesn't prove evolution, either. Before you can "prove" evolution by showing changes within species, you have to know the origins, and that's what the evolutionists can't prove. Also, he shows that although species do change, they aren't gaining any new information. Even though they may be improving, it's always through a loss of information.

EVERYONE Should Get This

This book should be purchased by anyone interested in the origins debate. Creationists will like it because it is written from a strongly Biblical point of view. Intelligent designers will like it for the broad scope of evidence it provides supporting the ID position. Evolutionists probably will not like it :-) but since this represents close to the "state-of-the-art" arguments on the other side it is a quick way to be familiar with the logic they'll face in any debate type situation. Those who are unsure where they stand should read this with an open yet critical mind, ready to be persuaded. Those not interested in the origins debate should read it to see why they should be - in my opinion the point of view expressed in this book is literally being censored from our classrooms and this should be cause for concern in any society believing in the benefits of pluralistic inquiry. For all this gushing, quite frankly I thought the book could have been easily twice as long. Some sections clearly require thought to flesh out fully the underlying rationale. Relative brevity might be a benefit, however: the main parts of arguments are stated free from what some might view of distracting detail while adequate citations are provided for those interested in digging deeper. Particularly useful is the section on "Arguments Creationists Shouldn't Use." This is a very needed corrective: such a book as this not only will serve to push evolutionists toward greater honesty but will keep the creationist side more honest as well, both of which should be expected by letting both sides of a debate fully air their arguments (which, sad to say, doesn't seem to be happening to the extent that it should). This section also gives the lie to notions that creationists are rigidly wedded to an unchangeable array of out of date arguments, given that the author is clearly arguing (though not in these words) that some of these doubtful arguments should be considered "vestigial." ;-) In sum, this book strengthens my opinion that the theory of evolution will one day go the way of the dinosaur, (theoretical vestigiality, if you will) and I consider it required reading.

How dare Dr. Sarfati, PHD, write such a book!

Secret: http://www.answersingenesis.org/home/area/bios/j_sarfati.asp provides the biography of this author. Anyone can see that someone with his credibility should not dare write such a book. "He obtained a B.Sc. (Hons.) in Chemistry with two physics papers substituted (nuclear and condensed matter physics). His Ph.D. in Chemistry was awarded for a thesis entitled `A Spectroscopic Study of some Chalcogenide Ring and Cage Molecules'. He has co-authored papers in mainstream scientific journals on high temperature superconductors and selenium-containing ring and cage-shaped molecules. He also had a co-authored paper on high-temperature superconductors published in Nature when he was 22." His arguments in this book intend to open our minds away from the more popular closed minded dogmatists' proposals. Years ago, after completing an undersgrad degree in Physics, I found myself shocked that important relevant scientific data like these were kept hidden in the remote parts of the library. To this date, I do not know why so many who seek objective analysis of scientific data will not allow our students to make up their own mind by allowing them to read books that present both viewpoints for and against evolution? All I hear is how dare scientific scholars expose readers to such data and how horrible it is for anyone to have an open mind on an imperically tough to understand subject like creation. Hope authors like Dr. Sarfati can bring us out of the dark ages of scientific mysticism and help all of us have access to more relevant data before making up our minds about what science proves and where it leaves us hanging in the dark.

DEMYTHOLOGYZING SCIENCE

Since the eighteenth century, a new myth has evolved, according to which, science would expose all "myths" in the Bible. The end result would be a purely rationalist, materialist and naturalist account of the christian message. Or better still, its total destruction. Rationalism and darwinism played an important part in this programme. Armed with their own naturalistic prejudices, theologians like Graaf, Welhausen, Bultmann, have spent their lives attempting to demythologizing the Bible. Darwinism was seen by many, including christians, as a fatal blow in the authority of the Bible. Well, after two centuries we are lucky enough to know for sure that they have failed. We can now clearly see that their strategy has been flawed since the begining. I specially enjoyed that one about the creationist founder of Scientific American. Creationists do care about science after all. Jonathan's Safarti's work demonstrates that the time has come for the Bible to strike back and demythologize science. The first victim, as Safarti notes, should be the silly Gould's NOMA concept, that relates science to the real world and confines religion to your head. This idea couldn't be more nonsensical, once you believe that God created the real world, including your mind. In fact, it is God that makes any objective scientific knowledge of the real world by your subjective mind both possible, reliable and meaningful. Many evolutionists's arguments are so silly that they seem to be deliberately designed to prove, beyond any doubt, that there is no essencial difference between men and apes in the way they think. But the simple fact that evolutionists like Dawkins or Gould are able to articulate and express thoughts, as silly as they may be, through language is enough to differentiate them from primates in an essential way. The best way for evolutionists to prove their point about the lack of any significant difference between man and apes would be for them to stop with all their scientific writing and with all other specifically human activities. We can now state that evolutionism in itself is a myth based on an inconsistent set of myths. Just think of the "big bang", "prebiotic soup", "cambrian explosion", "fossil record", "gradualism", "punctuated equilibrium", "vestigial organs", "junk-DNA", "macroevolution", "transitive forms", "dino-to-bird", "embrionic recapitulation", etc., etc. Darwinists like Gould, Mayr, Lewontin, and Dawkins are some of the most creative mythmakers these days. They have never generated one single compelling fact that could prove evolution beyond reasonable doubt. The overwhelming majority of scientists that believe in these myths do so because mostly because they have never really confronted the evidence to the contrary, as I myself had the opportunity to realize several times, when I confronted some geology and biology's PhD's in my University. They were surprised at the strenght of my "fundamentalist" arguments, but just couldn't answer them. Th