The strange cancel culture of Darwin fanatics backfires on the whole profession of biologists, caught in a closed mindset

The data of the eonic effect in world history gives us one of the few direct observations of ‘evolution’ that we have, albeit of civilizations. But the evolution of man in deep time most likely shows a similar or the same type of process. And the process is way beyond current science. Perhaps that is why biologists contract into a funk: natural selection, perhaps the most idiotic oversimplification of a hypercomplex reality that you could imagine.
In general evolution has to mediate the emergence of organisms which cannot self-assemble at random. The real process of evolution is tantamount to the generation of organisms, and in history of civilizations. There is no way around this and the myths of Darwinism are completely stupid.
Evolution clearly has to be a planetary level process, and therefore perhaps a branch of the cosmology of planets which seem to be the cradles of life and its evolution.
The eonic effect although complicated shows a completely natural process that can operate over ten millennia (in fact far more than that) on a particular species, doing so in discrete phases or transitions far apart in time, and able to gestate the abstractions of form into something that can then be tested in an environment. The work of Darwin is almost ridiculous here. Lamarck was much closer although his thinking is a bit closer to philosophy than science. But his idea of evolution on two levels is born out.
At this point scientists in the biological field get authoritarian and refuse to listen to outside critics. The thinking of Dawkins is a form of delusive obsession with the design argument. We have discussed that here many times: design is real in nature and is not a theological issue so Dawkins is hysterical here in an egregious manner that has created a cancel culture of critics. The problem there is that cancel culture backfires, and encloses professional culture in a bubble of denial and draconian measures against critics.
It has to collapse at some point, and the question will remain, how could scientists get into such a strange form of group ideological hysteria.
In any case the eonic effect is clear but incomplete data of the evolution of civilizations and in a way it is what we might suspect, but awesome in its scale.
Follow the argument and skip this obsession with Darwin, shared even by leftists whose distortions of natural selection by such as Stalin have been grotesque.

You mentioned in one of your blog posts that this article ( was an interesting challenge to the eonic model. What did you mean by that? Do you touch on this in the new book? You ask a good question…

Source: Email: the eonic model and war – 1848+: The End(s) of History

The baffling persistence of Darwinism…//Fred Hoyle did this fifty years ago…

The persistence of selectionist Darwinism is almost incredible and the damage done is hard to repair. But biologists are constantly producing new sophistries that the non-specialist can’t evaluate.
The whole game is pointless and yet the science community is determined to safeguard their equivalent of the doctrine of the resurrection as a public propaganda. The whole thing smacks of economic ideology as Social Darwinism and that again is a check against the reputation of and trust in science.

Behe dismantles the fundamental claim of evolutionary theory that mutations and natural selection naturally drive life toward greater complexity as new information is constantly generated. In stark…

Source: Fred Hoyle did this fifty years ago…//Michael Behe’s Darwin Devolves Topples Foundational Claim of Evolutionary Theory – Darwiniana

 Evolutionary psychology versus the eonic effect…

Evolutionary biologists have to be the dumbest of scientists…For over two generations critics have pointed to the failures of selectionist darwinism but the professional cadre is almost belligerent in its rigidity. Small wonder then that the crackpot evolutionary psychology should also be a stronghold of confusion.

A look at the eonic effect suggests something vastly more complex and further that what we call the eonic effect gives us a glimpse of the larger dynamics of evolution, and this has occurred throughout history.

A key issue, since the crackpot bestseller of Harari sees man as a coming ‘god’, is the inability of biologists, or scientists in general, to grasp the phenomenon of ‘consciousness’. Its account in terms of natural selection is idiocy.

>Source: Does the Theoretical Arrow Fired by Jane Goodall End at the Feet of Jair Bolsonaro? –