RSR Interviews Walter ReMine Pt. 2

 * Illusions of Evolution Exposed by Information Engineer: Real Science Radio's Bob Enyart and Fred Williams continue their fascinating interview of electrical engineer and information expert Walter ReMine who made a significant contribution to the anti-evolution literature with his book, The Biotic Message.

* Naive Natural Selection and Uphill Evolution: Today's program explains the difference between naive natural selection, that is, the way the evolutionists sell Darwinism to the public, vs. the convoluted reality of how the theory has itself evolved to attempt to, even theoretically, account for the origin of organs, functions, and species. Fred mentions that Walter ReMine was a contributor to an online evolution simulator, Mendel's Accountant, which anyone can use to see for themselves some of the severe problems with evolution theory including a mutational lode problem called error catastrophe. And speaking of naivety, consider the faith that the Darwin lobby has in mutations, as compared to the hard reality being admitted by leading scientists. From a professor of medical genetics at the University of South Carolina (formerly, ass't professor, biochemistry, at Harvard Medical School), Christian Schwabe: "However, to invoke strings of beneficial mutations that suffice to reshape one animal into the shape of another is not merely unreasonable, it is not science." Schwab, 2001

* 2015 Update Upon Evolutionist Will Provine's Passing: World renowned committed evolutionist Will Provine has passed away. We would want to pray for his soul, if God hadn't made clear that it is appointed unto man once to die, and then the judgment (Heb. 9:27) and that upon death, the great gulf between the redeemed and the lost is impassable (Luke 16:26; in fact just as impassible as Einstein's Gulf). Regarding Walter Remine's observation of natural selection as the evolutionist's magic wand, consider this Cornell Universities comment in the 2001 update to his acclaimed text, Origins of Theoretical Population Genetics:

Having natural selection select is nifty... Such talk was excusable for Charles Darwin, but inexcusable for evolutionists now. Creationists have discovered our empty "natural selection" language, and the "actions" of natural selection make huge, vulnerable targets. The second major problem concerns natural selection at different levels of the evolutionary process. ... The chances are small that a particular DNA sequence in mammals is 'adapted through natural selection.'

* Fitness Terrain as an Example of Natural Selection: Like Richard Dawkins' Climbing Mt. Improbable, Darwinists sell to the public the simple and naive idea that evolution is uphill, ever upward. While that was how the theory began, it's intellectuals soon realized that such a mechanism could not account for Earth's varied species. It turns out that by their own theory what is called "the fitness terrain" presents severeA Darwinian fitness terrain obstacles to evolution, and populations get stuck and further theoretical evolution ceases. Consider Walter ReMine's quote of the Darwinist text, Principles of Population Genetics:

Any population on a... fitness peak is destined to stay there because natural selection will not carry the population down into any of the surrounding valleys and thus, perhaps, into the domain of attraction of a higher fitness peak. The population is simply "stuck". -Harvard Professor Daniel L. Hartl, 1980

* You'd Get Bad Legs Long Before You Got Good Wings: By Darwin's theory, consider a species that had partial legs and was evolving legs. Conceptually speaking, they are marching up the hill, up the fitness terrain. By the theory, eventually, they may end up with great legs! But how are they going to get wings? Wings allegedly evolved from legs in dinosaurs, insects, and bats. A species of dinosaurs, for example, would have to start evolving down the fitness hill, and across a fitness valley, and over some berms, cross a ditch, and up some other fitness hill that would create wings. So, to theorize how a whole species would, over countless generations, evolve back down a fitness hill (essentially de-evolving some functionality), and go across a fitness valley, over to another hill, and start again another improbable climbing, is quite the bizarre intellectual exercise. And this is the soft underbelly of actual Darwinian theory that the evolution evangelists, the high school biology books, and the popular science media, keep far from the public. The masses are simply dumbed down to believe in naive natural selection: upward, ever upward! But in reality, you'd get bad legs long before you got good wings, and since it's survival of the fittest, the whole alleged evolutionary process ends in catastrophe.

* The Fog of Evolution: Bob and Fred ask Walter ReMine about his widely quoted observation that evolution theory is more like a fog. A fog settles on the landscape. Neo-Darwinism is not a theory that can be tested. Rather, you throw data at it, and the theory simply morphs around the data. As ReMine put it, "Evolutionary theory adapts to data like fog adapts to landscape."

* RSR Walter ReMine Interviews
- RSR Interviews Walter ReMine Pt. 1
- RSR Interviews Walter ReMine Pt. 2 (this show)  
- ReMine on the Origin of Sexual Reproduction Pt. 3
- Walter ReMine on Haldane's Dilemma Pt. 4

NOTE: Part 2 Technical Difficulties Fixed.
We repaired the problem with the original show except that Walter wasn't able to participate much for the first few minutes while our engineer worked on audio difficulties. We apologize for the inconvenience.

* Enyart's Creationist Claim from 1997 Eventually Confirmed By Richard Dawkins: Real Science Radio co-hosts Fred Williams and Bob Enyart play audio from an old Bob Enyart Live program in which Bob claimed that in Richard Dawkins' books, he just assumed evolution and he didn't give evidence. A dozen years later, Dawkins admits that in all of his previous books, he assumed, but did not provide evidence. That vindicates Bob Enyart's direct statement of a 1997 caller who was recommending that Bob read Dawkins (which Bob had done, but which the caller had not).

* The Altenberg 16
-- Evolutionists Doubting Natural Selection: For the meeting that Walter mentioned, see on CMI's website the section in Dominic Statham's article on the Altenberg 16 for a brief account of leading evolutionists who are beginning to admit that Natural Selection cannot explain biological diversity. Statham also mentions ReMine's recently published review of a book on the Altenberg 16. One of the reasons that evolutionists are recognizing that natural selection is insufficient to explain life on Earth is that a genetic toolbox exists in more or less all organisms. This genetic toolbox is so widely distributed that according to evolutionary theory, it would have had to be present before the diversification of those life forms. That is, it would have had to be present in the so-called Precambrian era, back when single-celled organisms would have no need for all those regulatory genes. (The problem is similar for evolutionists to the discovery that 70% of sponge genes are similar to human genes, even to build structures that sponges lack, like muscles and nerves.) So, how would those genes originate prior to the need for these genes, since natural selection cannot look ahead? For this reason and others, evolutionists themselves are beginning to admit, first that Darwin was wrong on the tree of life, and secondly, that he was wrong about the sufficiency of natural selection!

* Origin of Life: As Walter ReMine stated on this program, "Creationists own the origin of life issue." And Bob Enyart rebutted the typical atheist claim that, "God didn't make man, man made God." For, belief in aliens is irrefutably, undeniably a man-made thing. Then atheists say that aliens made man. So, atheists are doing exactly what they falsely accuse Christians of. See also a discussion about Richard Dawkins' belief in aliens and how it falsifies certain atheist claims.

* Quote-Mining Deep, Rich, and Wide Veins: Evolutionists make knee-jerk accusations against creationists, including ReMine, whenever we reference evolutionists, claiming, virtually always without even attempting to explain how it is that we are taking quotes out of context. What we are typically doing however, is quoting the contrary-to-interest claims of hostile witnesses, which kinds of statements tend to be the most reliable in all of human history. Mining is most profitable where the vein runs rich and deep and wide. Everywhere evolutionists have expressed intensely disappointment with the evidence? for evolution in their own fields. Many assume the real evidence is in some other field, and that phenomena is repeated so often and pointed out so often by we creationists that the Denver audience chuckled when this exact thing happened in Bob Enyart's Age of the Earth Debate with a geophysicist, who was asked for the best evidence that the earth is old. And, as many guessed he might, he answered, "star light." (Even if star light were billions of years old, that doesn't mean that, say, a satellite on which if falls, nor the earth, is billions of years old.) Merely mouthing the mantra "quote mining" doesn't negate all the contrary-to-interest observations published by countless evolutionists.

Example -- Out-of-Context Accusation Against Enyart by Popular Atheist AronRa: To this accusation, Bob Enyart responded to Ra, "There's not one person in your audience or my audience, or that you can name in the entire world -who knows about Darwin, who doesn't think that Darwin believed in evolution." AronRa accepted my challenge to justify his claim that creationists allege that Darwin didn't believe in evolution. He responded by naming... who? An anonymous poster to a web-based street-slang dictionary. That's who. And that's not a name. That's how far Aron had to go to justify his part in the relentless claim against creation authors and ministries that we commonly take our sources out of context. For example, regardless of the urban legends about Darwin that untrained members of the general public might claim, creationists have every right and are not taking Darwin out of context to quote him saying that, "To suppose that the eye... could have been formed by natural selection, seems, I freely confess, absurd in the highest degree." There is nothing about repeating that point that is out of context.

Today’s Resource: Get the greatest cell biology video ever made! Getting this on DVD:
- helps you to share it with others
- helps keep Real Science Radio on the air, and
- gets you Dr. Don Johnson's book as a bonus!
Information is encoded in every cell in our DNA and in all living things. Learn how the common world view of life's origin, chemical evolution, conflicts with our knowledge of Information Science. Finally, information Science is changing the way millions of people think about all living systems!

Also, have you browsed through our Science Department in the KGOV Store? You just might LOVE IT! We offer a 30-day money back guarantee on all purchases.