2. Christian Darwinism is not in trouble? No? Want to put it to a real test?

Well, let’s start with the fact that Christians and theists in general are decreasingly respected as sources of information in a society whose science is so largely governed by atheist tax and donor burdens.

Look what happened to poor Michael Reiss, Church of England clergyman who was - heart and soul! - in favour of force feeding Darwinism to schoolkids, persuading them that they are merely hapless lumps of "evolution".

It would never have occurred to Reiss to question the system; he only wanted to '"help" - the usual social worker's wretched excuse for bad judgement and wrong action.

Reiss was driven out mainly because he was a clergyman. I bet he wouldn’t have been driven out if he were an atheist popularizer. In the shallow Brit culture today, he would have been lauded, except that his problem was that he really believed what others use only for gain - in power, prestige, or cash. And they are wiser than he was. That's what it is good for,not because it is true.

Atheists and theistic evolution fellow travellers think they can kid us all, because it is so easy to get politicians to holler and thump stupidly for Jesus at prayer breakfasts - as long as it never means anything. But clearly, for whatever reason, that is not working now in North America, where lots of people still have kids or grandkids, and we need to think about a real future, not a pretend one. But Christian Darwinism still attracts funds, as the BioLogos Institute attests.

You think I am being too harsh? Thomas Cudworth said much the same thing here. Okay, forget him, for now. Look at Giberson’s piece at the BioLogos site, a former home of Francis Collins, better known for being a capable genomics administrator than a clear thinker, who is now part of the United States' administration and avid supporter of human embryonic stem cell research.

Biologos is now a home, so far as I can see, for everyone who wants to persuade theists that the universe and/or life forms show no evidence of design (so, of course, human embryos can just be trashed, right? Just more stuff for the blender ...).

Real test: What credible real evidence is there that a deer-like creature turns into a whale by purely Darwinian means?* Fine with me if it is true, but how do we know it is, apart from the need to advance the claims of Darwinism by plumping up stuff that is largely speculation?

* And don't try to con us by claiming that Darwinism is the same thing as evolution. Increasing numbers of people just know better now.

Next segment: Why are we not all contented Darwinian cows?

Find out why there is an intelligent design controversy: