Louis Agassiz
Paleontologist Louis Agassiz, Contemporary and Rival of
Charles Darwin
Christians deserve to know the truth. There was always an alternative to Darwinism...

Most Atheists would rather this piece of history remain forgotten...

The concept of "Transformationism" existed before Charles Darwin. Contemporaries such as Agassiz held to the old age of the earth and fossil record. Stripped away, Darwin is left with little of his own creation, not the "renegade scientist" some have made him out to be.

AGASSIZ, LOUIS JEAN RODOLPHE (1807-1873), Swiss-American naturalist, born at Motiers, Switzerland. He studied medicine and natural history at Zurich, Heidelberg, Erlangen, and Munich. In 1826 he prepared a description of Brazilian fishes from materials collected by the Bavarian naturalist, Spix, a work which attracted the notice of Cuvier, with whom Agassiz afterward studied in Paris. From 1832 to 1846 Agassiz was professor of natural history of Neuchatel. During this time (1832-42) he prepared and published his Researches on Fossil Fishes (5 vols., 311 plates). Repeated visits to England gave him material for his work Fossil Fishes of the Old Red Sandstone (1844). He spent the summers of this period in studying the glaciers of the Alps, which gave him material for his works, Studies of Glaciers (1840) and The Glacial System (1847), in which he advanced views then new in geology, including his theory of a "glacial epoch," which attracted great attention and interest. In 1846 Agassiz delivered a course of lectures at Lowell Institute, Boston, which resulted in his appointment in 1848 as Professor of Natural History in the Lawrence Scientific School of Harvard University, which position he held until his death, except for 2 years (1852-54) spent at Charleston, although his later life was given to lecturing and exploration, rather than to teaching.

In opposition to the Darwinian theory of evolution, Agassiz held to "epochs of creation." His explorations in the United States included the Lake Superior region (1848) and the Florida coral reefs (1850-51). From 1865-1866 he was in Brazil and published his researches there under the title of A Journey in Brazil (1868).

"...In opposition to the Darwinian theory of evolution, Agassiz held to 'epochs of creation'."
In 1872 he made a journey to California around Cape Horn. In 1873 he held the first session of the summer school of zoology on Peniske, Is., Buzzards Bay, Mass. He was buried at Mt. Auburn, where his monument is a boulder from the Swiss glacier of the Aar. - Republished from Funk and Wagnalls Encyclopedia, ©1950
And another scientist of the age, aside from Louis Agassiz, which Charles Darwin himself commended as "inimitable observer" and an, "incomparable observer," who disagreed with Darwin's theories, Jean Henri Fabre, a famed Entomologist. There were many scientists who disagreed with Darwin's theories, and this by no means disparaged their credentials or knowledge in their own area of expertees. But Atheists are so keen on Darwin's theory, because it attempts to explain how the diversity of species came to be, and a "designer" is not necessary in the scheme. Darwin's theory challenged, and outraged Theists who wanted to believe in a hands-on perfectly "designed" creation. But the world is not "perfect," Genesis itself states it was merely "good," not perfect. And, when taking a close look at the "designs" one would naturally be left to wonder. The prophets themselves spoke of the old earth passing away and a new heaven, and new earth... the bad "designs" in nature, how the lion would be made anew and lay down next to the lamb... a child playing near an asp, and not be harmed by it. Atheists latched on to Darwin and his theory, believing it would promote their own selfish agenda and religion. But the kicker is, Charles Darwin never took a position on God. He was only a scientist. He cared not to discuss the matter! However, when read correctly, the verses in Genesis merely state, God stood afar off and commanded the earth and waters "to bring forth," it entirely fails to mention direct acts of design on several occasions. Darwin's theory of Natural Selection does not contradict with that literal interpretation of Genesis.