Hoyle and Wickramasinghe are evolutionists

From EvoWiki

Contents 1 Claim 2 Source 3 Responses 4 Fallacies contained in this claim 5 Related claims 6 See Also 7 Acknowledgments

Claim

Because of the astronomical odds against evolution, some evolutionists were forced to back down. For example, Hoyle and Wickramasinghe, authors of the book Evolution From Space, surrendered by stating: "These questions are much too complex to be expressed in numbers."

Source

• Anon, 1985. Life--How Did It Get Here?, Watchtower Bible and Tract Society of New York, Inc., p. 47.

Responses

1. Fred Hoyle and Chandra Wickramasinghe are not evolutionists in any meaning of the word. They are astronomers and mathematicians. They were not educated as evolutionists, and they reject many aspects of modern biology as much as creationists do. They made statements like that simply because they wanted the numbers to be like that because they needed arguments for their astronomy theories about an infinite universe.
2. The only reason why Hoyle and Wickramasinghe reject current evolutionary theory is that several portions of it, namely where fossil evidences shows birds and mammals appearing well over 150 million years ago, contradict their pet idea that a space-born virus that rode in with the meteor that slew the dinosaurs 65 million years ago mutated reptiles, causing them to evolve into mammals and birds. In order to legitimize their pet idea that "alien viruses" helped to spur the evolution of mammals and birds at the end of the Cretaceous, they made the demonstratedly false accusation that the fossils of Archaeopteryx lithographica were all counterfeit fakes, nevermind that there is a difference of over 80 years between the discoveries of the first and last fossils.
3. It bears repeating that all points of Hoyle and Wickramasinghe's claim that A. lithographica have been countered, and in doing so, revealed their gross unfamiliarity with the processes of fossil-formation, or even the fossils themselves (such as claiming that the tail was one large feather).

Fallacies contained in this claim

• Appeal to Authority (weight of statements of scientists)
• Argument from Ignorance (lack of evidence taken as negative evidence)
• Texas Sharpshooter Fallacy (attributing statistical significance to a past tense biophysical event)

Related claims

• Francis Hitching is an evolutionist

See Also

Why is Creationism not a Scientific Theory?

Controversies of Archaeopteryx in Wikipedia

Acknowledgments

• Thomas Kettenring