Changes

{{cquote|'''L.H. Matthews'''<br />''The fact of evolution is the backbone of biology, and biology is thus in the peculiar position of being a science founded on an unproved theory—is it then a science or faith?''<ref>Matthews, L. Harrison (1967), "Introduction" to Darwin, Charles (1860), ''The Origin of Species'', 2nd ed. (London:  J. M. Dent), pp. x-xi.</ref>}}

{{cquote|'''L.H. Matthews'''<br />''The fact of evolution is the backbone of biology, and biology is thus in the peculiar position of being a science founded on an unproved theory—is it then a science or faith?''<ref>Matthews, L. Harrison (1967), "Introduction" to Darwin, Charles (1860), ''The Origin of Species'', 2nd ed. (London:  J. M. Dent), pp. x-xi.</ref>}}

{{cquote|'''J.W.N. Sullivan'''<br />''The hypothesis that life has developed from inorganic matter is, at present, still an article of faith....''<ref>Sullivan, John W.N. (1933). ''The Limitations of Science'' (New York:  The Viking Press), p. 95.</ref>}}

{{cquote|'''J.W.N. Sullivan'''<br />''The hypothesis that life has developed from inorganic matter is, at present, still an article of faith....''<ref>Sullivan, John W.N. (1933). ''The Limitations of Science'' (New York:  The Viking Press), p. 95.</ref>}}

{{cquote|'''[[R.L. Wysong]]'''<br />''Evolution requires plenty of faith; a faith in L-proteins that defy chance formation; a faith in the formation of DNA codes which, if generated spontaneously, would spell only pandemonium; a faith in a primitive environment that, in reality, would fiendishly devour any chemical precursors to life; a faith in experiments that prove nothing but the need for intelligence in the beginning; a faith in a primitive ocean that would not thicken, but would only haplessly dilute chemicals; a faith in natural laws of thermodynamics and biogenesis that actually deny the possibility for the spontaneous generation of life; a faith in future scientific revelations that, when realized, always seem to present more dilemmas to the evolutionists; faith in improbabilities that treasonously tell two stories—one denying evolution, the other confirming the creator; faith in transformations that remain fixed; faith in mutations and natural selection that add to a double negative for evolution; faith in fossils that embarrassingly show fixity through time, regular absence of transitional forms and striking testimony to a worldwide water deluge; a faith in time which proves to only promote degradation in the absence of mind; and faith in reductionism that ends up reducing the materialist's arguments to zero and forcing the need to invoke a supernatural creator.''<ref>Wysong, R.L. (1976). ''The Creation-Evolution Controversy'' (Midland, MI:  Inquiry Press), p. 419.</ref>}}

{{cquote|'''[[R.L. Wysong]]'''<br />''"Evolution requires plenty of faith; a faith in L-proteins that defy chance formation; a faith in the formation of DNA codes which, if generated spontaneously, would spell only pandemonium; a faith in a primitive environment that, in reality, would fiendishly devour any chemical precursors to life; a faith in experiments that prove nothing but the need for intelligence in the beginning; a faith in a primitive ocean that would not thicken, but would only haplessly dilute chemicals; a faith in natural laws of thermodynamics and biogenesis that actually deny the possibility for the spontaneous generation of life; a faith in future scientific revelations that, when realized, always seem to present more dilemmas to the evolutionists; faith in improbabilities that treasonously tell two stories—one denying evolution, the other confirming the creator; faith in transformations that remain fixed; faith in mutations and natural selection that add to a double negative for evolution; faith in fossils that embarrassingly show fixity through time, regular absence of transitional forms and striking testimony to a worldwide water deluge; a faith in time which proves to only promote degradation in the absence of mind; and faith in reductionism that ends up reducing the materialist's arguments to zero and forcing the need to invoke a supernatural creator."''<ref>Wysong, R.L. (1976). ''The Creation-Evolution Controversy'' (Midland, MI:  Inquiry Press), p. 419.</ref>}}

{{cquote|'''T. Lessl'''<br />''By calling evolution fact, the process of evolution is removed from dispute; it is no longer merely a scientific construct, but now stands apart from humankind and its perceptual frailties. Sagan apparently wishes to accomplish what Peter Berger calls "objectification," the attribution of objective reality to a humanly produced concept . . With evolution no longer regarded as a mere human construct, but now as a part of the natural order of the cosmos, evolution becomes a sacred archetype against which human actions can be weighed. Evolution is a sacred object or process in that it becomes endowed with mysterious and awesome power.''<ref>T. Lessl (1985). "Science and the sacred cosmos: the ideological rhetoric of Carl Sagan".  ''Quarterly Journal of Speech'', vol. 71, no. 2, p. 178.</ref>}}

{{cquote|'''T. Lessl'''<br />''By calling evolution fact, the process of evolution is removed from dispute; it is no longer merely a scientific construct, but now stands apart from humankind and its perceptual frailties. Sagan apparently wishes to accomplish what Peter Berger calls "objectification," the attribution of objective reality to a humanly produced concept . . With evolution no longer regarded as a mere human construct, but now as a part of the natural order of the cosmos, evolution becomes a sacred archetype against which human actions can be weighed. Evolution is a sacred object or process in that it becomes endowed with mysterious and awesome power.''<ref>T. Lessl (1985). "Science and the sacred cosmos: the ideological rhetoric of Carl Sagan".  ''Quarterly Journal of Speech'', vol. 71, no. 2, p. 178.</ref>}}

{{cquote|'''M. Grene'''<br />''Today the tables are turned. The modified, but still characteristically Darwinian theory has itself become an orthodoxy, preached by its adherents with religious fervor, and doubted, they feel, only by a few muddlers imperfect in scientific faith.''<ref name="mgreen">Grene, Marjorie (November 1959).  "The Faith of Darwinism".  ''Encounter'', p. 49.</ref>}}

{{cquote|'''M. Grene'''<br />''Today the tables are turned. The modified, but still characteristically Darwinian theory has itself become an orthodoxy, preached by its adherents with religious fervor, and doubted, they feel, only by a few muddlers imperfect in scientific faith.''<ref name="mgreen">Grene, Marjorie (November 1959).  "The Faith of Darwinism".  ''Encounter'', p. 49.</ref>}}