Facts of Life: Shattering the Myths of
A Presentation by the
The book is an objective
examination of the scientific merits of Darwinism in light of the most recent
scientific findings in the field and in the laboratory, from a scientific rather
than religious perspective. Its main conclusion is that neo-Darwinism is little
more than a persistent urban myth, unsupported by evidence or experiment.
Publication details are:
Shattering the Myths of Darwinism
By Richard Milton
Published by Park Street Press
One Park Street
Tel: 802 767 3174
Fax: 802 767 3726
Price $24 hardback
Some details are given below
of the contents and some press quotes. Please feel free to pass on this message
to anyone you think may be interested.
Shattering the Myths of Darwinism
By Richard Milton
Part One: Chaos
Chapter 1. A National
Darwinism is the only theory
of origins taught in schools and universities worldwide. Yet although science
can demonstrate conclusively the circulation of the blood, or the expanding
universe, or the value of physical constants, science has so far been unable to
produce any direct evidence for evolution by genetic mutation and natural
selection. The theory is revered, but remains conjectural.
Chapter 2. Through the
The past two decades have
seen many new research findings in every one of the complex interlocking set of
disciplines that go to make up the Darwinian theory: findings that undermine and
challenge many fundamental tenets on which the theory is constructed. These
include tenets as elementary as the age of the Earth, the formation of
sedimentary rocks and the formation of the main features of the Earth's crust,
the limits to specific variation, the causes of extinctions, and even the
possible origins of life - long considered settled in broad outline. Yet these
new findings have been given short shrift by the ruling ideology of the life
Chapter 3. A Matter of
Most people -- including
most teachers -- have been led to believe that the rocks of the geological
column and the fossils they contain have been dated absolutely by radiometric
methods. In reality, none of these rocks or fossils can be dated by radiometric
methods and their assigned dates are estimates -- based on Darwinian
Chapter 4. The Key to the
Radiocarbon assay has been
found to be flawed and unreliable. In one recent case, South African 'bushman
paintings' dated as 1,200 years old by Oxford University's carbon accelerator
were found to have been painted at evening classes by a Johannesburg housewife.
Chapter 5. Rock of
All radiometric methods of
dating have been found to be deeply flawed. Uranium-lead, potassium-argon and
rubidium-strontium have all been found to give wildly inaccurate dates. Dating
scientists get around this unreliability by selecting 'suitable' rocks to date
and rejecting 'unsuitable' rocks, their suitability being judged by Darwinian
Part Two: Clay
Chapter 6. Tales from
Before the Flood
Can sedimentary rocks be
formed rapidly, or are millions of years necessary? A major sedimentary
formation excavated in Sumeria was caused by a flood in historical times.
Chapter 7. Fashioned from
According to the ruling
ideology of Uniformitarian geology, "The Present is the Key to the Past". Yet
careful analysis of the rocks of the geological column shows that nowhere in the
world today are there rocks forming that are anything like the historical rocks
of the Earth's crust. In reality, the present entirely fails as a key to the
past. Moreover, recent experiments in France and the US have shown that
stratified rocks can form rapidly and simultaneously -- not over millions of
Chapter 8. An Element of
There is conclusive evidence
that coal beds forty or more feet in thickness can form rapidly, not over
millions of years. If coal can form rapidly, why not other sedimentary
Chapter 9. When Worlds
The idea of catastrophism --
rapid formation of rocks -- is anathema to conventional geology. Yet there is
mounting evidence for catastrophic processes. Examples include the young age and
rapid building of the world's mountain chains in historical times; the gigantic
extent of certain rock formations, requiring singular, acute causes; and the
occurrence of extinctions on a massive scale of terrestrial -- not marine --
Chapter 10. The Record of
If Darwinian processes of
gradual evolutionary change had taken place the rocks of the Earth's crust would
contain fossil evidence of such processes. The rocks should contain sequences of
fossils from adjacent strata showing indisputable signs of gradual progressive
But this is not what is
shown in the sequence of the rocks. Nowhere in the world has anyone met this
simple evidential criterion with a straightforward fossil sequence from
successive strata. Yet there are so many billions of fossils available from so
many thousands of strata, that the failure to meet this modest demand is
inexplicable if evolution has taken place in the way Darwin and his followers
have envisaged. It ought to be relatively easy to assemble not merely a handful
but hundreds of species arranged in lineal descent. Schoolchildren should be
able to do this on an afternoon's nature study trip to the local quarry: but
even the world's foremost paleontologists have failed to do so with the whole
Earth to choose from and the resources of the world's greatest universities at
Part Three: Chance
Chapter 11. Survival of
Although universally taught
and widely accepted, the concept of 'natural selection' or 'the survival of the
fittest' is no more than an empty tautology, incapable of explaining the origin
of species. Experimental evidence formerly accepted in support of the concept,
such as industrial melanism in moths, is now regarded as irrelevant to
An even more damaging
criticism of the concept of natural selection is that - limited though its
content may be - it is so nebulous that it can be made to fit a whole range of
mutually contradictory outcomes of the evolutionary process.
As a theory, natural
selection makes no unique predictions but instead is used retrospectively to
explain every outcome: and a theory that explains everything in this way,
explains nothing. Natural selection is not a mechanism: it is a rationalization
after the fact.
Chapter 12. Green Mice
and Blue Genes
In the first edition of On
the Origin of Species Darwin said; 'I can see no difficulty in a race of bears
being rendered, by natural selection, more and more aquatic in their habits,
with larger and larger mouths, till a creature was produced as monstrous as a
This is Darwin's central
idea of evolution in a nutshell: bears can become whales, or whale-like, given
enough time and enough natural selection. However Darwin withdrew this claim
from the second and later editions of the book.
Almost certainly this was
because as an animal breeder he knew from first hand experience that no plant or
animal breeder has ever succeeded in producing a new species by selective
breeding. Primarily this is because of what Harvard's Ernst Mayr called "genetic
homeostasis" -- the barrier beyond which selective breeding will not pass
because of the onset of sterility or exhaustion of genetic variability.
Chapter 13. The Beak of
Writer Jonathan Wiener has
claimed that Darwin's finches on the Galapagos Islands represent an example of
"Evolution in real time" and his book, the "Beak of the Finch" has been
instrumental in confirming many people's belief in Darwinian processes of
genetic mutation and natural selection.
Yet this interpretation of
the data on Darwin's Finches is categorically contradicted by clear evidence
that all the 13 "species" of ground finch on the island are in fact members of
the same species who breed fertile offspring and who differ merely in diet and
Darwinist make many claims
of observed speciation. These claims vanish when examined closely and are seen
as no more than pseudo- speciation. In some cases, it is merely subspecific
variation being passed off as speciation. In others it is cases of freak
degenerative mutations which play no evolutionary role.
Chapter 14. Of Cabbages
The only mechanism in
neoDarwinism for introducing novelty of form is genetic mutation. Yet
advantageous or beneficial spontaneous genetic mutation remains no more than a
hypothetical necessity to the neo-Darwinist theory.
No one has ever observed a
spontaneous inheritable genetic mutation that resulted in a changed physical
characteristic, aside, that is, from a small group of well-known and usually
fatal genetic defects. Because noone has ever observed such an event, noone
really knows whether they occur at all and, if so, how often. Because
deleterious mutations are known to occur, Darwinists appeal to the statistics of
large numbers. If deleterious mutations can occur, then given enough time
beneficial mutations must occur.
This fundamental part of the
neoDarwinist theory remains unsupported by evidence or experiment.
Chapter 15. The Ghost in
Computers have been used
apparently to simulate the evolution of "insect" like graphics images
("biomorphs") through Darwinian processes of mutation and natural selection.
Yet such programs are not a
true representation of random mutation coupled with natural selection. On the
contrary they are dependent on artificial selection in which the operator
controls the rate of occurrence of mutations.
It is the operator who
chooses which are the lucky individuals to receive the next mutation - it is not
decided by fate - and of course it is the most promising ones who are chosen.
That is why they end up looking like recognizable images from the operator's
Above all, such computer
experiments falsify the most important central claim of mechanistic Darwinian
thinking; that, through natural processes, living things could come into being
without any precursor.
Part Four: Creation
Chapter 16. Pandora's
By far the strongest primary
evidence for evolution, for common descent and for Darwinian processes of
mutation and natural selection, is that of homology -- the name given to the
anatomical correspondences between different species that biologists and
paleontologists have noted and studied for centuries.
Darwin observed; 'What can
be more curious than that the hand of a man, formed for grasping, that of a mole
for digging, the leg of the horse, the paddle of the porpoise, and the wing of
the bat should all be constructed on the same pattern and should include similar
bones in the same relative position?'
This classic case of
homology - the forelimbs in vertebrates - turns out in fact to be flawed, since
forelimbs develop from different body segments in different species. In the
newt, the forelimbs develop from trunk segments 2,3,4 and 5; in the lizard from
segments 6,7,8 and 9; and in humans from segments 13,14,15,16,17 and 18.
Similarly, there are many
other cases both from embryology and from molecular biology which show that
homology is largely an illusion that is not maintained at the embryological
level or the molecular level. Different genes are responsible in different
species for specifying the same anatomical features.
Chapter 17. Paradigm
Darwinism became buttressed
at an early stage by a powerful array of supporting evidence, held to confirm
its basic principles, but which in fact represented nothing more than the
assumptions of the ruling ideology of Darwin's era. These assumptions concerned
a broad range of minutely described natural phenomena, such as the persistence
of vestigial organs in the human body, left behind by evolution, and the
recapitulation of former evolutionary stages by embryos.
currently cites 'more than 100' organs of the human body which are supposed to
have lost their function, and to be mere appendages which time and further
evolution will no doubt dispel entirely from the human frame. The list includes
organs such as the pineal gland, the thyroid gland, the thymus, the coccyx, the
appendix, the ear muscles and the tonsils. Modern scientific examination of
these claims shows that they are based simply on ignorance of the function of
the organs concerned.
Chapter 18. Down from the
Scores of "missing links"
between humans and apes have been claimed by Darwinists since Eugene Dubois
discovered "Java Man" in 1891.
"Java Man" is now accepted
as having been an extinct ape, and every single claimed "missing link" fossil
has been re-assigned either as an extinct ape or as a human essentially the same
as modern humans.
"Lucy" and other
Australopithecines are now known to be extinct apes unrelated to humans, while
"Neanderthal man" and "Homo habilis" are known to have been humans not
significantly different from living humans. The missing link is still
Chapter 19. Hopeful
There are many scientific
alternatives to neoDarwinism most of which are ignored. They include Lamarckism
(inheritance of acquired characteristics), the origin of life from space,
various forms of vitalism, and some entirely original ideas such as 'morphic
resonance' and 'formative causation'.
Despite Lamarckism being
always referred to as 'long ago discredited', the fact is that many recent
experiments with both plants and animals have confirmed some form of inheritance
of acquired characters.
Chapter 20. The Facts of
The chief defect of
neoDarwinism is that is fails to provide a global supervisory mechanism that
would ensure the continuity of the extremely high levels of genetic integrity
evidenced in nature and that would explain holistic biological phenomena such as
the re-growth of the salamander's leg, the metamorphosis of the butterfly, or
recovery from the 'eyeless fly' gene.
Chapter 21. The Evolution
The neo-Darwinian idea of
evolution by chance mutation coupled with natural selection has from its
inception been welcomed as an extremely powerful tool of explanation. It has
been adopted by some of the most distinguished scientific and philosophical
minds of the twentieth century to explain phenomena as diverse as animal and
human behavior, social movements and trends, and the progressive development of
inanimate objects ranging from the elements to the stars, to galaxies and even
the universe itself.
This is powerful, heady
stuff. But if the idea of neo-Darwinian evolution is unsupported by evidence or
experiment when applied to the heredity of plants and animals, what factual
basis is there for applying the concept to other natural phenomena?
A particularly unfortunate
and entirely fraudulent adoption of Darwinism in recent years has been the
economic Darwinism that has influenced the economic and social policies of most
Chapter 22. On Being
NeoDarwinism fails to
explain satisfactorily a whole range of extraordinary natural observations --
starting with the thick skin on the soles of our feet, which is a genetic
inheritance. Fish secrete 'mirror scales' to camouflage themselves against
predators, but their skin has to be exactly seven millionths of a centimeter
thick or it will not work. Can such precision be the result of undirected,
Chapter 23. The Fish That
Darwinists in the early
decades of this century believed they had identified the fish from which all
land-swelling creatures descended: the coelacanth. This identification was
shattered when a living specimen of the coelacanth was caught by fishermen. A
scientific cautionary tale.
Chapter 24. Angels Versus
The intense battle between
Darwinists and their opponents has raged unabated for more than a century. In
recent decades, some Darwinists have resorted to academic censorship, with the
result that papers criticising neoDarwinism are not published and the subject is
no longer openly debated by press and broadcast media. Journalists who try to
write about these issues are routinely suppressed, on the grounds that they must
be secret creationists or "creationist allies". Even the Internet has its
Chapter 25. Old Theories Never Die
Darwinism is the only remaining mechanistic
philosophy from the Nineteenth century that continues to be taught in schools
and universities -- Marxism and Freudianism having been comprehensively
Darwinism is flat-earth science. Yet it continues
to be the ruling ideology of the life sciences, and is likely to continue to
dominate until a new generation of biologists grows up willing to question
science's sacred cow.
Shattering the Myth of Darwinism
Some press quotes
"The world of science faces the biggest challenge yet to one of its most
basic beliefs: Charles Darwin's theory of evolution. An authoritative
compilation of scientific findings."
The Sunday Times
"Richard Milton's "Shattering the Myths of Darwinism" . . . could shake the
"religion" of evolution as much as "Honest to God" shook popular Christianity 30
"Milton . . . utters some important warnings. We ignore them at our
The Sunday Times
"In his popular book "Shattering the Myths of Darwinism", journalist Richard
Milton shows Darwinism as a crumbling edifice, supported only by a conservative
The Daily Telegraph
"One of Richard Milton's chief purposes is to argue that, in the absence of
sufficient scientific evidence, Darwinism should not continue to be taught in
schools and universities as though it were holy writ. In this he succeeds
"I am glad that a new book (by an agnostic) has just been published which
brings together much of the evidence against neo- Darwinism. Bang goes the
empirical basis on which neo-Darwinism rests."
Bishop Hugh Montefiore
The Church Times
"Shattering the Myths of Darwinism" -- as well as being agreeably readable --
punctures the myth more effectively than anybody has done before."
The Irish Independent
"Milton's immensely readable book dispels many of Darwin's theories, not
least of all his idea of 'the survival of the fittest'."
"If a religious creationist had written it, no one would have paid attention.
But Milton is a professional science writer and well informed on what is going
on in the departments of geology and old bones."
"To those fed up with the atheistic reductionism of certain Darwinists the
book may come as an answer to prayer, especially as Milton claims no religious
Michael B. Roberts
Church of England Newspaper
"The cover has a picture of a shattered Darwin, and with a passing reference
to Marxism, the book attempts to consign Charles to the same dustbin as Karl.
Here there is a valid point: 'Ideological Darwinism has replaced scientific
Darwinism in our educational system'."
E. G. Nisbet
"When a reputable science correspondent of more than 20 years' experience,
who does not claim to be religious, raises serious doubts, then it is time to
sit up and listen."
"On subject after subject: methods of dating, the fossil record,
microbiology, geology, etc., Milton shows the inadequacy of the evidence for
"Milton's criticism of evolution does not spring from religious or
philosophical pre-suppositions, he is simply convinced that evolution is
"Charles Darwin? Outmoded. Evolution? A myth. Not the usual assertions of a
fundamentalist from the bible belt, but those of a disciple of the scientific
method. And based on scientific arguments."
"Richard Milton . . . presents a vigorous refutation of neo- Darwinism based
entirely on the evidence of science."
"Backed by his experience as engineer and science journalist, and inspired by
an interest in geology and palaeontology, he explains his doubts and
difficulties with the general theory of evolution in a lucid, non-technical and
very readable style."
"There are three main reasons that "Shattering the Myths of Darwinism" seems
poised to make unprecedented inroads into the Darwinist camp. First, Milton
makes an absolutely devastating case, leaving not a stone upon a stone of the
received evolutionist credo. Secondly, he puts his case against evolution with
the calmness and confidence of a man who is justifiably sure of his facts and
with the modest clarity of a debater who knows that his arguments hold water and
need no rhetorical flourishes but only lucid exposition to prevail. And thirdly,
he disarms the knee-jerk reaction his opinions are likely to excite from
disciples of the scientific establishment by reassuring them that he has no wish
to reinstate the Book of Genesis."
Book Review Supplement