从1859年达尔文的《物种起源》问世以来，不断受到宇宙学、物理学、生物学等多学科和新发现的挑战。达尔文的进化假说与事实之间有很多矛盾。随着时间的推移和研究的深入，这些矛盾变得更加尖锐、不可调和。

分子生物学家、医学博士道顿（Michael Denton）在1985年出版的《进化论：陷入危机的理论》（Evolution: A Theory in Crisis）一书中称达尔文进化假说是“20世纪最大的迷信”。²⁶⁷

2001年美国一群优秀科学家创立了美国智库发现研究所（Discovery Institute），他们在发起的“对达尔文主义进化假说的科学质疑”宣言中写道²⁶⁸：“我们质疑达尔文宣称的用生物随机突变和自然选择论来解释复杂的生命，我们鼓励（人们）谨慎检验达尔文理论存在的证据。”

宣言联署者来自美国、英国、日本、俄国、以色列、香港、捷克、匈牙利、印度、尼日利亚、波兰等多个国家和地区，是从事进化生物学、生物学、化学和其它自然科学研究的国际著名教授、博士、科学院院士等。他们中有些在国际知名大学从事科研工作，如英国剑桥大学、美国哈佛大学、耶鲁大学、哥伦比亚大学、斯坦福大学、加州大学、康奈尔大学、普林斯顿大学、布朗大学、宾夕法尼亚大学等。

联署者还包括多名曾得到诺贝尔奖提名的科学家，如进化生物学家士丹利‧萨尓斯（Stanley Salthe）、乔治亚大学量子化学家亨利‧舍费尔（Henry Schaefer）、俄罗斯自然科学院胚胎学家利瓦伊‧比洛斯夫（Lev Beloussov）和美国科学促进会研究员赖尓‧詹森（Lyle Jensen）。

“发现研究所”的网站上写道：“这是科学家关于他们──对与新达尔文主义有关的科学证据的评估以及对现代达尔文理论证据有仔细审查的必要性──给予肯定的专业声明。”“达尔文主义的科学异议声明是为了纠正公共记录，表明有科学家支持公开审查与现代达尔文理论有关的证据，并质疑新达尔文主义能否解释自然世界的复杂性和多样性。”

截至2020年4月，已经有化学、生物学、医学、物理学、地质学、人类学、古生物学、统计学及其它领域的一千一百多名科学家和研究人员签署了这份针对达尔文进化假说的质疑宣言。

2018年，印度人力资源发展部部长萨蒂亚帕尔‧辛格（Satyapal Singh）认为达尔文理论“从科学上来说是错误的”，因为没有“看到任何一只猴变人”，并敦促将达尔文进化论从学校课程中删掉²⁶⁹。印度新德里的一些学校已经放弃教授达尔文的进化假说²⁷⁰。

十、为什么进化假说一直持续至今？

尽管科学家们发现进化假说是一个漏洞百出的学说，为什么它在科学界仍然占据主导地位、欺骗世界一百多年？其中原因众多。

首先，科学界具有的思维惯性。现代科学的发展通常是以前人的研究为基础，吸收其成果，通常不太会彻底抛弃或推翻之前的研究。因为理论学说的惯性，一些原有理论体系的内容已经被发现是错的，但因为其中有些观点看上去似乎也有一定道理，学术界还是把它作为一种研究或观点保留，不彻底推翻。科学界的思维惯性一般都不愿意跳出原来的思维框架去彻底反思。

第二，进化假说片面认为人是物质结构的组合体，忽视了人的能量和精神特性，而后者才是人更本质的属性。停留在单纯的物质层面上探索生命起源，不可能抓其本质、看到真相，只能被进化假说越绕越糊涂。这一点会在第四、五章详细论述。

第三，未经证明的进化假说，已经堂而皇之地进入学校课堂被大肆宣讲。质疑“进化假说”的科学发现被歪曲，质疑的文章被延误发表，质疑“进化假说”的科学家被打压。这种学术观点的排他性垄断，实际上对人们起到了某种程度的洗脑作用，造成越来越多的危害、形成恶性循环而不能自拔。这一点会在第六章详细论述。

第四，以分析型思维为主的现代实证科学，试图寻找一种和传统文化不同甚至对立的对生命起源的解释。这种从未证实的假说却被扩展到了社会科学和人文科学中，造成的恶果远远超出生物学领域。进化假说的生存竞争逻辑一旦运用于社会实践，就摧毁了人类道德的根基，使人类物化以致堕落。这一点会在第七章详细论述。

第五，19世纪宗教式微后，人类社会出现信仰危机，加上工业革命后科学技术蓬勃发展、人类生产力大增、机械成为帮手，进化假说是在这样的背景下产生的。就如青少年进入叛逆期一样，人们容易抛弃传统的价值观，寻求新奇和叛逆的学说。

前面的第一章，我们为大家疏理了进化假说的逻辑错误、否定进化论的实验数据和科学事实；第二章是破除进化假说的基本迷思；第三章深入解读了否定进化假说的现代分子生物学研究成果。

基于前面三章的大量科学研究和试验证明，进化假说已经被彻底否定了。它甚至连假说都谈不上，更应该从教科书中被删除。那么，人的生命到底是怎么来的，我们在下面的章节将继续探讨。待续。

参考文献：

231. Baum, D. (2008) Reading a Phylogenetic Tree: The Meaning of Monophyletic Groups. Nature Education 1(1):190.
https://www.nature.com/scitable/topicpage/reading-a-phylogenetic-tree-the-meaning-of-41956/

232. By Ernst Haeckel – First version from en.wikipedia; description page was here. Later versions derived from this scan, from the American Philosophical Society Museum., Public Domain, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=2731459

233. Willi Hennig. Phylogenetic Systematics. Translated by D. Dwight Davis and Rainer Zangerl. University of Illinois Press Urbana and Chicago. 1966.
https://books.google.ch/books?id=xsi6QcQPJGkC&printsec=frontcover&source=gbs_ge_summary_r&cad=0#v=onepage&q&f=false

234. Woese, C. R., Kandler, O., & Wheelis, M. L. (1990). Towards a natural system of organisms: proposal for the domains Archaea, Bacteria, and Eucarya. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 87(12), 4576–4579.
https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.87.12.4576

235. Woese, C. R., & Fox, G. E. (1977). Phylogenetic structure of the prokaryotic domain: The primary kingdoms. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 74(11), 5088-5090.
https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.74.11.5088

236. Hedges, S. B., Marin, J., Suleski, M., Paymer, M., & Kumar, S. (2015). Tree of Life Reveals Clock-Like Speciation and Diversification. Molecular Biology and Evolution, 32(4), 835-845.
https://doi.org/10.1093/molbev/msv037

237. Hinchliff, C. E., Smith, S. A., Allman, J. F., Burleigh, J. G., Chaudhary, R., Coghill, L. M., Crandall, K. A., Deng, J., Drew, B. T., Gazis, R., Gude, K., Hibbett, D. S., Katz, L. A., Laughinghouse, H. D., McTavish, E. J., Midford, P. E., Owen, C. L., Ree, R. H., Rees, J. A., . . . Cranston, K. A. (2015). Synthesis of phylogeny and taxonomy into a comprehensive tree of life. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 112(41), 12764-12769.
https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1423041112

238. Hug, L. A., Baker, B. J., Anantharaman, K., Brown, C. T., Probst, A. J., Castelle, C. J., Butterfield, C. N., Hernsdorf, A. W., Amano, Y., Ise, K., Suzuki, Y., Dudek, N., Relman, D. A., Finstad, K. M., Amundson, R., Thomas, B. C., & Banfield, J. F. (2016). A new view of the tree of life. Nature Microbiology, 1(5), 1-6.
https://doi.org/10.1038/nmicrobiol.2016.48

239. Kumar, S., Suleski, M., Craig, J. M., Kasprowicz, A. E., Sanderford, M., Li, M., Stecher, G., & Hedges, S. B. (2022). TimeTree 5: An Expanded Resource for Species Divergence Times. Molecular Biology and Evolution, 39(8).
https://doi.org/10.1093/molbev/msac174

240. Hall, B. G. (2013). Building Phylogenetic Trees from Molecular Data with MEGA. Molecular Biology and Evolution, 30(5), 1229-1235.
https://doi.org/10.1093/molbev/mst012

241. Cambrian Period. National Geographic.
https://www.nationalgeographic.com/science/article/cambrian

242. M.Y. Stoeckle, D.S. Thaler. Why should mitochondria define species? Human Evolution. Vol. 33; n. 1-2 (1-30) – 2018.
DOI: 10.14673/HE2018121037; https://phe.rockefeller.edu/wp-content/uploads/2018/12/Stoeckle-Thaler-Final-reduced-002.pdf

243. Amy Joi O’Donoghue. Why this 300 million-year-old fossil discovered in Utah has the paleontology world buzzing? Rare creature found in Utah’s Canyonlands National Park. Nov 8, 2021, 8:24pm CEST.
https://www.deseret.com/utah/2021/11/8/22770397/rare-fossil-canyonlands-national-park-petrified-forest-paleontology-discovery-reptile-mammal

244. McNutt, E. J., Hatala, K. G., Miller, C., Adams, J., Casana, J., Deane, A. S., Dominy, N. J., Fabian, K., Fannin, L. D., Gaughan, S., Gill, S. V., Gurtu, J., Gustafson, E., Hill, A. C., Johnson, C., Kallindo, S., Kilham, B., Kilham, P., Kim, E., … DeSilva, J. M. (2021). Footprint evidence of early hominin locomotor diversity at Laetoli, Tanzania. Nature, 600(7889), 468-471.
https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-021-04187-7

245. Britannica, The Editors of Encyclopaedia. “octopus”. Encyclopedia Britannica, 20 Jun. 2023, https://www.britannica.com/animal/octopus-mollusk. Accessed 17 July 2023.

246. Andrea Michelson. Octopus Arms Have Minds of Their Own.
https://www.discovery.com/science/Octopus-arms

247. Steele, E. J., Al-Mufti, S., Augustyn, K. A., Chandrajith, R., Coghlan, J. P., Coulson, S., Ghosh, S., Gillman, M., Gorczynski, R. M., Klyce, B., Louis, G., Mahanama, K., Oliver, K. R., Padron, J., Qu, J., Schuster, J. A., Smith, W., Snyder, D. P., Steele, J. A., . . . Liu, Y. (2018). Cause of Cambrian Explosion – Terrestrial or Cosmic? Progress in Biophysics and Molecular Biology, 136, 3-23.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pbiomolbio.2018.03.004

248. Steele, E. J., Al-Mufti, S., Augustyn, K. A., Chandrajith, R., Coghlan, J. P., Coulson, S., Ghosh, S., Gillman, M., Gorczynski, R. M., Klyce, B., Louis, G., Mahanama, K., Oliver, K. R., Padron, J., Qu, J., Schuster, J. A., Smith, W., Snyder, D. P., Steele, J. A., …Liu, Y. (2018). Cause of Cambrian Explosion – Terrestrial or Cosmic? Progress in Biophysics and Molecular Biology, 136, 3-23.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pbiomolbio.2018.03.004

249. Jombart, T., Archer, F., Schliep, K., Kamvar, Z., Harris, R., Paradis, E., Goudet, J., & Lapp, H. (2017). apex: phylogenetics with multiple genes. Molecular ecology resources, 17(1), 19–26.
https://doi.org/10.1111/1755-0998.12567

250. Lynch M. (1989). PHYLOGENETIC HYPOTHESES UNDER THE ASSUMPTION OF NEUTRAL QUANTITATIVE-GENETIC VARIATION. Evolution; international journal of organic evolution, 43(1), 1–17.
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1558-5646.1989.tb04203.x

251. Pennisi E. (1998). Genome data shake tree of life. Science (New York, N.Y.), 280(5364), 672–674.
https://doi.org/10.1126/science.280.5364.672

252. Pennisi E. (1998). Genome data shake tree of life. Science (New York, N.Y.), 280(5364), 672–674.
https://doi.org/10.1126/science.280.5364.672

253. Woese, C. R., & Fox, G. E. (1977). Phylogenetic structure of the prokaryotic domain: The primary kingdoms. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 74(11), 5088-5090.
https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.74.11.5088

254. Pennisi E. (1998). Genome data shake tree of life. Science (New York, N.Y.), 280(5364), 672–674.
https://doi.org/10.1126/science.280.5364.672

255. 王博群、吴宗贤、赵淑妙。正本溯源──生物亲缘演化树的脉理和论战。中央研究院生物多样性研究中心。
https://www.biodiv.tw/zh_popscience-20210622102722

256. Jombart, T., Archer, F., Schliep, K., Kamvar, Z., Harris, R., Paradis, E., Goudet, J., & Lapp, H. (2017). apex: phylogenetics with multiple genes. Molecular ecology resources, 17(1), 19–26.
https://doi.org/10.1111/1755-0998.12567

257. Westram, A., & Johannesson, K. (2016). Parallel Speciation. Encyclopedia of Evolutionary Biology, 212-219.
https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-800049-6.00076-7; https://sci-hub.st/https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-800049-6.00076-7

258. Gautam, P. (2020). Divergent Evolution. In: Vonk, J., Shackelford, T. (eds) Encyclopedia of Animal Cognition and Behavior. Springer, Cham.
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-47829-6_501-1; https://cloudflare-ipfs.com/ipfs/bafykbzacedtlm37pzn66pv43uygzj7mqjzogeltrpltxkm7sg2buhjfqmzliw?filename=Jennifer%20Vonk%2C%20Todd%20Shackelford%20%28eds.%29%20-%20Encyclopedia%20of%20Animal%20Cognition%20and%20Behavior-Springer%20International%20Publishing.pdf

259. Gabora, L. (2013). Convergent Evolution. Brenner’s Encyclopedia of Genetics (Second Edition), 178-180.
https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-374984-0.00336-3

260. Ho, S. (2008) The molecular clock and estimating species divergence. Nature Education 1(1):168.
https://www.nature.com/scitable/topicpage/the-molecular-clock-and-estimating-species-divergence-41971/#:~:text=The%20molecular%20clock%20hypothesis%20states,time%20and%20among%20 different%20 organisms

261. Dr. Michael Denton, Evolution: A Theory in Crisis, Published by Adler & Adler, Distributed by Woodbine House,1985.
https://alta3b.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/09/crisis1.pdf

262. W. Ho, S. Y., & Duchêne, S. (2014). Molecular-clock methods for estimating evolutionary rates and timescales. Molecular Ecology, 23(24), 5947-5965.
https://doi.org/10.1111/mec.12953

263. Dr. Michael Denton, Evolution: A Theory in Crisis, Published by Adler & Adler, Distributed by Woodbine House,1985.
https://alta3b.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/09/crisis1.pdf

264. Alok Jha, science correspondent Wed 5 Sep 2012 20.03 BST. Breakthrough study overturns theory of ‘junk DNA’ in genome.
https://www.theguardian.com/science/2012/sep/05/genes-genome-junk-dna-encode

265. Marchant, D.B., Chen, G., Cai, S. et al. Dynamic genome evolution in a model fern. Nat. Plants 8, 1038–1051 (2022).
https://doi.org/10.1038/s41477-022-01226-7

266. Pennisi E. (1998). Genome data shake tree of life. Science (New York, N.Y.), 280(5364), 672–674.
https://doi.org/10.1126/science.280.5364.672

267. Dr. Michael Denton, Evolution: A Theory in Crisis, Published by Adler & Adler, Distributed by Woodbine House,1985.
https://alta3b.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/09/crisis1.pdf

268. A Scientific Dissent from Darwinism. (2023, January 23). In Wikipedia.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_Scientific_Dissent_from_Darwinism

269. Darwin’s theory wrong, nobody saw ape turning into man: Minister Satyapal Singh. Press Trust of India, Aurangabad | ByPress Trust of India. Jan 21, 2018.

270. John Reed and Jyotsha Singh. New Delhi. New Delhi erases Darwin from textbooks.
https://twitter.com/jefflijun/status/1666438689860251651/photo/1

《透视“进化论”》写作组