In Cato's case its true support of choice, definitely not support for ID.
1) Evolution is a extremely well supported scientific theory, with far more tons of documentation than the holocaust
Its is a very supported theory, but "evolution solely by means of random mutation and natural selection, as the only or overwhelming source for the diversity of species" doesn't have the same level of evidentiary support as the Holocaust, and probably can not have that level of support. We have seen evolution in action, we have seen much longer term but less direct evidence for it in the fossil record. But the fossil record shows change over time more than it really prove the mechanism of change. I have no real doubt that evolution by mutation and natural selection is and has been the overwhelming source for the creation of new species. But the evidence for it isn't as solid as such well known and widely witnessed historical events as the Holocaust, 9/11, Pearl Harbor, the Civil War, The Rape of Nanking etc. Stating that isn't denying or denigrating evolution, its just recognizing fact. The exact details of some or all of those events might possibly be misunderstood but the existence is about as solid as you can get. All but metaphysically certain.
There were of course, not millions of witnesses for the Holocaust. Millions dead, but not millions killing them.
There where millions, perhaps many millions of witnesses to some part of the Holocaust, and the millions of dead bodies are themselves evidence. There where thousands of witnesses of the killings themselves, and millions of witnesses to concentration camps and forced slave labor. (Including of course the people in the camps or performing forced labor)
The real horror of the holocaust was not known (accept perhaps in small circles) in the West until the camps were found near the wars end.
There was some evidence available to the West even before the camps were found, but the level of evidence before that time doesn't really matter. The evidence existed after the camps were found and after Jews and other people talked about what they saw or experienced.
2) Evolution is not strictly "random mutation and natural selection".
Yes it amounts to more than just that, but that's the core of it. Technically evolution just means change over time. I used "random mutation and natural selection" to more precisely and relevantly deal with a specific mechanism of change over time. Many believers in ID would accept the idea that change happens over time but they would say that God makes the change, or that some intelligent designer of some sort set initial conditions such that the change would happen later.
Denying evolution of any sort is more extreme than denying that random mutation and natural selection are the sole or overwhelming cause of the evolution.
3) Evolution is viewed as offensive, not just inaccurate
Its true that some, perhaps many, see it that way, if probably less than few Holocaust denial as offensive. But I'm not sure how relevant that fact is. To the extent it means anything its an argument against teaching evolution, although it is a weak one and not one that I support. |
