Rating: 
Summary: Neo-Darwinism at the Bar of Reason
Review: Phillip Johnson has taken Darwinian evolution to court and the verdict rendered is guilty. He argues incisively that Darwinism cannot be verified by the empirical evidence. Therefore the very foundation of Darwinism is not rooted in science but a philosophy of naturalism. It is this worldview of naturalism, which colors all the evidence and provides the shaky foundation for Darwinian science. Darwinists have a healthy corner on the market of science by being the very ones who define science in their favor. They argue that the most basic characteristic of science is reliance upon naturalistic explanations. Any appeal to the supernatural or transcendent by definition is excluded. Any form of theistic creationism is therefore excluded. Such a theory of theistic creation is viewed by scientists as non-science and by many as non-sense. The deck has been clearly stacked against theism. Johnson's main task in Darwin on Trial is to show that the conflict is not between science and non-science, but between two competing worldviews. There is naturalism, which by definition excludes all forms of the divine, and there is the worldview of theism that argues for a God who created all things. It is this worldview clash, which is at the heart of the evolution debate. Johnson surveys the scientific evidence offered for evolution and finds it wanting. He deals with natural selection, mutation theory, and the fossil record, the vertebrate sequence, molecular evidence and prebiological evolution. He then examines the philosophical underpinnings of evolutionary theory and argues that evolution as fact is hinged upon philosophy and not science. It is a philosophical theory, which uses science only for minimal confirmation. The philosophical worldview of evolution colors all the empirical "confirming" evidence, which is used to verify the "truth" of Darwinism. The importance of Darwin on Trial is to show that the debate over evolution is a worldview clash. The empirical evidence still needs to be examined and debated, but no longer can either side claim absolute objectivity in interpreting the evidence. Interpretation is filtered through one's worldview and all scientists are required to acknowledge their worldview whether it is naturalistic or theistic. Darwin on Trial is accessible for both scientists and non-scientists. It is an enjoyable read as Johnson is astute in pointing out the many fallacies of Darwinian thought. On more than one occasion you are left in shock that a highly educated scientist such as Gould or Dawkins would make such logically fallacious statements. Johnson also provides a response to his critics as an appendix in the second edition. He responds to Stephen Jay Gould, Michael Ruse and many others who have attempted to debunk his book. If you are new to the debate or just want to freshen up this is a great place to start. The only major criticism I have is that there are no footnotes (only research notes in the back of the book). The documentation is there but a bit hard to follow at times. Other than this small criticism Phillip Johnson's Darwin on Trial steers a helpful course in the murky waters of evolutionary science.
Rating:
Summary: Looking under the rug
Review: Preceding negative reviews of this book have focused on issues of science: arguments about fossils, dating, etc. The real issue, which is addressed by Johnson & others elsewhere, regards philosophy. Most proponents of evolution today insist that only atheist science is "real" science. That implies they don't come to science with open minds, but with a commitment to explain the world in purely materialistic terms, regardless of what evidence (or lack thereof) there might be. It also means that all their pro-evolution arguments use a rhetoric designed to avoid any real argument; this is what Johnson is particularly good at exposing, given his legal training. Evolutionism is not a development of empirical science, but a far-reaching attempt to offer a new philosophical framework for humanity -- one independent of Christianity. The biological theory is almost an afterthought; it's full of holes because it is only there to support the "new metaphysic". The "logic" of evolution is: there's no God, but we're here, so there must be a means (purely materialistic) by which we came to be. The fault is in the assumption. Since the Enlightenment, science has not only been a tool to technological development; it has also had a philosophical side, providing a "new metaphysic" to replace that of Christianity, the dominant metaphysic of the previous historial "age". This is critically important -- science not only offers to describe the world, but to interpret it. The theories of the evolutionists are very important to this effort of offering a new interpretation. What do they tell us? That human life has neither meaning nor purpose, nor intrinsic value. In place of the Christian notion of creation in God's image, we now have offered to us creation via accident. In place of a view of human life as sacred, we now have offered to us a fully utilitarian view. The practical consequences of ideologies based on atheism/nihilism/darwinism include: mass murder, abortion, homosexuality (as an accepted "lifestyle"), euthanasia, etc. The horrors of the 20th century, including 200 million dead, show the results of these ideologies when put into practice in real societies. Judge the tree by the fruit. Philip Johnson (and others) do a great service just by calling into question the dogmas of atheist materialism (masquerading as "science") and evolutionism, which today are held to be unquestionable, particularly in public schools where the young are indoctrinated. This book is just a first step, an icebreaker, to get into the issue. I highly recommend Johnson's other books on evolution, and I look forward to reading "The Wedge of Truth" (having seen a preview in Touchstone magazine).
Rating: 
Summary: "Burn the Heretic at the Stake!"
Review: That seems to be the typical Evolutionist's reaction to the suggestion that Darwin's theory is flawed. Much like the religious radicals of old who excommunicated or tortured those whose scientific observations dared to contradict the tenets of their established orthodoxy, the Evolutionists of today harshly rebuke and calumniate those who would dare observe and comment on the fatal flaws in their quasi-religious and anti-scientific theory of evolution. As a law student, I was intrigued by the author's legal background, and his punishing analysis of Darwinism. Indeed, rhetorically, the author places Mr. Darwin and his surrogates on trial, and demands evidence to support their evolutionary conclusions. Like a good attorney, he dismantles their emotional cantings and reduces to smoldering ashes the edifice of macroevolution. I recommend this book to anyone with an open mind. As for those who demand evidence of God before believing in Him, I challenge them to apply the same standard to evolution: how is it possible that anyone could believe in macro-evolution when the fossil record is absolutely void of 'evolving' species? But, who am I to pose such a piercing question? After all, I'm just a heretic.
Rating: 
Summary: The book has already been PROVEN false
Review: Yes I said PROVEN. A CHRISTIAN who is also a scientist has broken down the outright lies in this book step by step.
http://www.talkreason.org/articles/honesty.cfm
Why any person would still consider this book at all valid is simply astounding. I say again a CHRISTIAN, who is also a scientist has shown MULTIPLE outright LIES in this book.
| 
