“Scientists who deliberately distort the evidence should be disqualified from receiving public funds.”

And we should add, be put in jail.

The dogma of unscientific Darwinism. A cult of intolerance and irrationality. Lizards jumped off of trees, flapping their legs and 'eventually' thanks to the goddess of time, turned into birds. The sponges got together and 'naturally selected' to become frogs. Lemurs via the god of random chance became socialist theologians – with distinctly less hair and odour. The protozoa thanks to the god of mutations, became a doctor expert in the liver. Okay. Got it.

Wells is a biologist and former cult member of the Darwin party. He apostasied. As with Islam, apostates from the cult of evolution, must be humiliated, tortured, if not killed and crucified. Darwinism like other dialecticals – Marxism, Leninism, Cult of Warmism, Islam – is a fraud, and outright stupidity. It is hard to understand why anyone who believes he is a 'scientist' or 'smart' would support such an outright idiocy. If Darwinism was science most would support it. But no evidence whatsoever exists for the idea that algae became Barrack Obama. As Wells laments:

evolution is promoted by its practitioners as more than mere science. Evolution is promulgated as an ideology, a secular religion.

biology students are being taught materialistic philosophy in the guise of empirical science. Whatever one may think of materialistic philosophy, there is no doubt that it is being imposed on the evidence rather than inferred from it

Welles dispatches with evident ease all of the 'icons' [or frauds as they should be called] of Darwin's cult. Like Popov, 'scientific socialism', Co2 as the only chemical agent in 'weather', or Islam is peace; the idea that fraud equals science, is rather perverse and inane:

icons of evolution misrepresent the evidence. One icon (the Miller-Urey experiment) gives the false impression that scientists have demonstrated an important first step in the origin of life. One (the four-winged fruit fly) is portrayed as though it were raw materials for evolution, but it is actually a hopeless cripple-an evolutionary dead end. Three icons (vertebrate limbs, Archaeopteryx, and Darwin's finches) show actual evidence but are typically used to conceal fundamental problems in its interpretation. Three (the tree of life, fossil horses, and human origins) are incarnations of concepts masquerading as neutral descriptions of nature. And two icons (Haeckel's embryos, and peppered moths on tree trunks) are fakes.

Nice. So the main icons of Darwin's cult, are frauds, fakes, lies, fantasies or outrageous exaggerations. This is science.

To wit:

Homology nonsense:

...[to] argue that homologous limbs point to common ancestry is a vicious circle: Common ancestry demonstrates homology which demonstrates common ancestry [for Darwinists this is called circular reasoning or (a big word) a tautology].

biologists have known for decades that homologous features are not due to similar genes, so the mechanism that produces them remains unknown

Follow the money honey:

majority of research done by Darwinists in the United States is funded by agencies of the Federal Government, primarily the National Institutes of Health (NIH) and the National Science Foundation (NSF); and much of the funding for origin-of-life research comes from the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA).

Dogmatic defenders of Darwinian evolution control not only most American universities, but they also wield enormous power over most public school systems

How about real biology or paleontology ?

neo-Darwinian genetics never resolved the paradox of genomic equivalence. In fact, the paradox recently deepened with the discovery that developmental genes such as Ultrabithorax are similar in many different animals-including flies and humans.

biologists have known for over a century that Haeckel faked his drawings; vertebrate embryos never look as similar as he made them out to be...

1996 study using 88 protein sequences grouped rabbits with primates instead of rodents;

branching-tree pattern of evolution is inconsistent with major features of the fossil and molecular evidence. The Cambrian explosion demonstrates that the highest categories of animals appeared first, thus turning Darwin's tree of life upside down. The molecular evidence, far from saving it, uproots it entirely. Yet the tree of life still dominates the iconography of evolution, because Darwinists have declared it to be a fact

The complexity of the 2 million or so species on this planet refutes, by itself, the dogmatic faith that grasses, grasshoppers and guppies are all derived from a 'common ancestor'. There is more faith in Darwin's account of how life developed, than in any religious-pagan culture one would care to juxtapose against it. More science exists in Beowulf than in the Origins of Species, the Bible of the Darwin cult.

level of kingdoms, phyla, and classes, descent with modification from common ancestors is obviously not an observed fact. To judge from the fossil and molecular evidence, it's not even a well-supported theory

Wells destroys all of the icons of evolution. In so doing the reader is constantly asking himself, 'how dumb is this cult?' Or perhaps 'how corrupt, venal, desperate and criminal' is this cult?