Darwin on Trial

By: Phillip E. Johnson

Narrated by: Frederick Davidson

Length: 6 hrs and 35 mins

Publisher's summary

Darwin's theory of evolution is accepted by most educated Americans as simple fact. This easy acceptance, however, hides from us the many ways in which evolution - as an idea - shapes our thinking about a great many things. What if this idea is wrong? What if "evolution" is just a word that covers up scientific ignorance of how the wonders of the living world could have been created?

Berkeley law professor Phillip Johnson looks at the evidence for Darwinistic evolution the way a lawyer would - with a cold dispassionate eye for logic and proof. His discovery is that scientists have put the cart before the horse. They prematurely accepted Darwin's theory as fact and have been scrambling to find evidence for it - mostly unsuccessfully. As the evidentiary difficulties have piled up, scientists have clung to the theory out of fear of encouraging religious fundamentalism, and in the process have turned belief in Darwinism into their own religion.

©1991 by Phillip E. Jackson (P)1992 by Blackstone Audiobooks

Challenging, disturbing, eye-opening

What I feared was that this book might be just another attempt to argue for a biblical creation story. It was not. In fact, there’s almost no discussion of intelligent design at all. What I hoped was that this book would begin to answer some of my questions about what seem to me to be troubling gaps in the current version of Darwin’s theory. Not only did it do that, it did it with a vengeance.

The fact is, I believe in evolution. I believe in it deeply. And yet, Philip Johnson’s examination of the evidence makes it clear that there are far more gaps in the theory than I had any idea existed. It shook me. Now I don’t really don’t know what to think. One thing is obvious, though, the theory has some serious problems — problems of which many scientists are aware but are reluctant to acknowledge. In the end, I’m sure evolution will win out, but not until some courageous future scientists step forward and acknowledge the gaps in our current explanation. Then, and only then, will we be able to begin to build a theory that truly works. Maybe this book is a start towards in that direction.

Should Be Required Reading/Listening

The data here is a great beginning to the counter-offensive needed to combat the "Stupid Science" that continues to both defy simple logic and be taught in public schools. Why must those who "claim" to be Scientific refuse (with hyper-religious zeal) to calmly discuss the possibility/probability of Supernatural Creation?

Should be read/heard by all, especially by those who would be terrified by the prospect of the existance of a Biblical God.

Great book! Very open and exposing

The author did a great job of not bashing Darwin but at the same time exposing the problems and bias when it comes to dealing with evolution. For those that don't just accept things the way they are presented but like to ask questions.
If you are interested in hearing a different point of view this book is for you.

What it is and what it is not

This book IS the imposition of the critique on Darwinism. What it IS NOT is the apology (defense) of any competing theory of why the natural order we currently observes exists. It is a logical fallacy to require a critic to supply his own positive alternative to the theory he is questioning. The work (as, for example, Kant’s work) should be judged on the basis of power of the critique itself and the success of the theory in question to withstand the critique. If at the end of this book evolution by natural selection appears to have failed basic tests for being called “science” then perhaps it simply does. At some point after 150+ years the Darwinist theory must either definitively answer the problems of abiogenesis, stasis, lack of transitionals in the fossil record, the Cambrian explosion, etc or must admit that it can’t and that it is time to look elsewhere. There may very well be a purely naturalistic mechanism for the “origin of the species,” but we may simply have not found it yet. One thing do sure, if Darwinism is the wrong path to finding it, then the stolid, dogmatic insistence that we stick with it will only delay progress along the correct path (or even trying another path).

Technical and informative

technical, but also easy to understand. provides a good counter to the common assumption that darwinism is fact. full of evidence and reason. a really good read.

Fancy

Obviously this is an audiobook so there are no pictures, but nevertheless I am 100% certain that the narrator has a waxed handlebar mustache and a monocle.

Brilliantly Done

Highly recommend this to you so that you might help guide your children in their education so that they are preparing to discern the difference between “theory “ and fact in the onslaught of academia to pressure students into beliefs constructed to prejudice students against anything that could be seen as supportive of a Creator (God).

Science and God are not mutually exclusive. I fear that left to the education system as it is today, they will be forced to choose.

Legal history of evolution controversy

This book has very little discourse on the scientific merits or failings of Darwin's theory of evolution. It covers the history of the legal disputes over it.

I am much more into the scientific side of the debate, so this book had relatively little to offer me.

BTW, I just finished "signature in the cell", which goes into a lot of detail about the theory that life somehow spontaneously came into being. Spoiler: so much had to be in place for life to start - including molecules that decay quickly - that it's just impossible. A long DNA strand with thousands of codons in just the right order is only the start.

Tremendous book!

Finally some common sense and real science with respect to the subject of evolution. Should be required reading for every science teacher.

Biased and Unsupported

Offers many attacks on Darwinian theory but provides little to no evidence to support creationism. Solid and fair criticisms at the beginning, however Johnson is too generalized when analyzing the scientific community