Shattering the Myths of Darwinism [Paperback]

Richard Milton's "Shattering the Myths of Darwinism" is an anti-Darwinist book, which earned the writer a brief notoriety after a series of conflicts with world-leading evolutionary biologist Richard Dawkins. Apparently, Dawkins persuaded a British newspaper not to publish an article by Milton, and wrote a scathing review of his book. Among other things, Dawkins called Milton a creationist ally or dupe.

Milton doesn't call himself a creationist. He's not a Christian fundamentalist, and seems to lack religious affiliation altogether. He even claims to believe in evolution. However, most of his arguments seem to be taken from creationist sources. Since these arguments are anti-evolutionary, they tend to contradict Milton's claim that he does believe in evolution, after all. This in itself was quite enough to anger the Darwinists. By contrast, the creationists were soon distributing Milton's book - I actually bought it from a young earth group in Sweden.

But there's more. Milton liberally makes use of arguments from the works of Melvin A. Cook, without mentioning the salient fact that Cook was a Mormon creationist. This explains one of Cook's more curious arguments: that the matter making up our planet might be over 4 billion years old, thus explaining the radiometric dates, but that the Earth might still be very young. Milton rehashes this argument, apparently without realizing that it's based on Mormon theology. The Mormons believe that matter is eternal, but that the gods didn't fashion the Earth out of this eternal matter until about 6000 years ago. Thus, Milton isn't even sure whether the Earth is old, making it even stranger how he can believe in evolution. Here, Milton in effect sides with "young earth creationists" or near-young earth creationists (such as Cook) against the "old earth creationists"! For a secular, non-Christian writer, this is surely unique.

In the last chapters, where Milton outlines his own alternatives, it seems that he somehow realizes these contradictions. First, he puts forward Lamarckian evolution and even spontaneous generation as alternatives to Neo-Darwinism. I presume the point is that Lamarckian evolution would be faster than Neo-Darwinian evolution, thereby making it possible to simultaneously believe in evolution and a younger Earth. Of course, spontaneous generation is...well, spontaneous. Second, he presents what I take to be his real alternative. Milton somehow believes that there is a conscious energy field or overmind at work in the universe, a force that somehow evolves (?) all living creatures on our planet, making them change at the right time, inducing their behaviour, and so on. The idea is far from clear, but it sounds like a religious concept, perhaps a form of pantheism or deism. In effect, Milton attempts to fuse evolution with special creation, in a manner that sounds similar to the Theosophists, Huston Smith, E.L. Grant-Watson and (I suppose) Owen Barfield. Nothing wrong with that, per se. However, I must say that Milton is much sloppier in his approach...

Milton might not worship the somehow-conscious, somewhat-nebulous Forcefield that brought us here, but functionally it's difficult to see the difference between his conception and the creator-gods of the various religious traditions. Yet, Milton has decided to remain an agnostic. Perhaps he simply wants to be seen as a courageous independent thinker? He is, after all, the patented inventor of...secular young earth near-creationism. If this "hopeful monster" can survive, is another matter entirely!

PS. I dissed this book rather badly when I reviewed it four years ago. This review (posted in 2012) is a more "objective" attempt to approach it. Enjoy. ;-)

I attended a lecture by this author a few years back, held incidently under the auspices of Mensa. Rather than being the 'rant and raving' approach suggested by some reviewers he presented his approach in an orderly, factual manner. The thrust of his lecture was to look at the FACTS - and base our understanding on these rather than just theories and conjectures. The book seeks to do this. The writer is a lifelong Scientific journalist and has researched a lot of facts known by but hidden from public view by the evolutionist lobby. The problem is that instead of looking at subject with an open mind we approach it (evolution etc.) with pre-conceieved ideas moulded in many cases by manipulative teaching and journalism based not on facts but theories and conjectures.
The book is a very readable attempt to encourage readers to consider that there are very concrete facts which go against the accepted views of evolution.
Approach the book with an open mind and you will find it challenging and thought provoking. Approach it from the point of view that the writer is 'ranting and raving' and you will totally miss the point of what he is tying to get across.
Having listened to the author I got the impression that he did a lot of research on his subject and approached it with an open mind and came to his conclusions after looking at the facts rather than from a mind set fixed and unwilling to look facts honestly.

Things in life are not always as they seem. Its not that I don’t believe that evolution is possible, or has happened, rather that I wanted to know the other sides of the story. This book delivers excellent accounts of how and why current neo-Darwinian thinking is the accepted, so-called, truth to our origins and why it shouldn’t be!! Read this book and be amazed at how people report what they want to find (even if they didn’t) and the role that reputation takes in what we believe.

Coverage of topics such as rock column aging, dating technologies, fossils, convergent evolution, design and more! Be challenged and don’t accept the norm; its not always right it seems!