Science is naturally the way we investigate the theory of evolution, just as science is used to test the theory of relativity. The debate on evolution is usually framed as a Bible versus Science debate, the framing being done by those with an axe to grind against religion. Even the famous Scopes trial was contrived, since no one in Dayton, Tennessee was enforcing the law against the teaching of evolution, and the ACLU had to shop around to find a district attorney who was willing to bring forward charges. But I digress.
The religion vs science posturing itself is a fraud. Augustine, no slouch in Christian thought, believed in evolution, which he saw as an unfolding of creation. I think he used the metaphor of an acorn unfolding into an oak. The conflict is really not against evolution per se, but against Darwinism which denies that there is any design in nature, and insists that chance alone is operative. And the debate usually characterizes all Christian thought in a literalist fashion, the anti-religionists needing a radical literalism for an opponent.
I never said that no animal has evolved. Micro-evolution is certainly not very controversial with anyone. What I have noted is that there are problems with macro-evolution, it's not anywhere as solid a theory as Einstein's theory for example, which has passed a number of tests. Tell me of some tests that we have done on evolution...I can't think of any. Maybe we can't test the theory, and just need to take it on Faith. What we do know is that Darwin's ideas on saltation have been junked, and something like Punctuated Equilibrium has replaced his ideas. The old saw that embryos reproduce evolution in their development has long been consigned to limbo...the horse series has been shown to be a fraud.... We don't know of any feedback mechanism where outside conditions can alter genetic coding, so we just have to rely on chance to produce useful mutations. We believe this even though we know most mutations are fatal....
It's been a while since I've read up on evolution. I'd like to see what Darwin's Black Box has to say, and Philip Johnson's Darwin on Trial. I'm pretty much an agnostic on how species develop, but even posing the question can get you in big trouble with the Fundamentalists on both sides of the debate. It has been great fun to see just how rigid the Evolution Is A Fact crowd get as they denounce the Snake Handlers on the other side. |
