Better By Design
According to the Bible, God created pretty much everything that exists on this planet (and most of space, apparently) in just six days. According to modern scientific belief, it took a little longer than that. And since then pretty much the entire human race has been arguing over which version of events is right.
Today, there's a story about this very argument on BBC News. Apparently, The Dover Area school board of Pennsylvania have made the teaching of the so-called intelligent design theory compulsory, while at the same time effectively removing evolution from the curriculum as unproven. In fact, this state of affairs (pardon the pun) seems to be quite prevailing in the USA, with over twenty states promoting the teaching of intelligent design as accepted fact.
Okay, let's look at both sides of the argument...
In his paper, The Origin Of The Species, Charles Darwin suggests that the diversity of life upon this planet is a direct result of the forces of evolution. Evolution works by the simple principle of "survival of the fittest" ... sort of. As mutations enter a given gene pool, those individuals with the most effective mutations live an easier or longer life, thereby propagating the mutation until it becomes a natural trait of the species in question. If you believe Darwin, then the reason we have ten digits, two eyes, a nose and all the component parts that we do is down to evolution. As the mutations increase, species split into individual breeds, and from there go on to form new species that either flourish and prosper or fail and die. Darwin used the fossil records at his disposal to classify and catalogue this process, effectively creating an evolutionary family tree for every living critter he could find. Her even went on a little cruise to examine the plants and animals in their native habitat. Scientific research suggests that this process (correctly labeled as a theory ... more about that in a bit) is ongoing, taking place all around us every day.
Creationists (people who believe in the intelligent design theory) hold with the Bible's account of where life came from. They say that gaps in the fossil record prove that Darwin's wrong, and that there is far too much diversity for it all to have happened Darwin's way, preferring instead the 'six days and a rest' approach used by God. Admittedly, there are those from within this camp who are willing to accept that evolution may have played a part in it somewhere but in most cases God did all the work and anybody who says otherwise is wrong.
To be honest, I'm surprised that this argument is still running. In the last hundred years or so, the fossil records have constantly been growing as new discoveries are made. In China, huge numbers of hitherto unknown prehistoric animals are being found almost on a daily basis, while in N. America the Utah Badlands still offer up a veritable cornucopia of ancient (long-dead) lifeforms. Even the biological history of the human race is being questioned regularly, and both schools of thought still continue to hold blindly to their own beliefs. Who's right and who's wrong?
Part of the problem stems from the fact that evolution is a theory. Now to most people the word theory is something that has been speculated but not proved. Unfortunately, that's actually a hypothesis, not a theory. A theory (in scientific terms, which is how it's used when applied to evolution) is a little more solid than that. According to dictionary.com, a theory is...
The important points here are that a theory explains "...a group of facts or phenomena..." and that it has usually been "...repeatedly tested or is widely accepted...". The theory of evolution has been studied, tested, re-evaluated and expounded upon repeatedly since Darwin, and the more strange and wonderful critters we dig up out of the ground, the more we understand that family tree that Darwin started.
The other problem is that evolution doesn't hold with the teachings of the Bible ... or does it?
In 1996, Pope John Paul II sent a message to the Pontifical Academy Of Sciences regarding this very subject, in which he accepts that "...the Encyclical Humani generis considered the doctrine of "evolutionism" a serious hypothesis, worthy of investigation..." For my own part, I simply turned to the Bible and re-read Genesis 1:11-26, where I discovered that every plant and animal was brought forth from either the ground or the sea. Now, I personally love the image of some omniprescient deity walking around and magically creating life but couldn't Genesis simply be another way of describing the evolution process. After all, even Darwin suggested that life originally came from the oceans. So in conclusion, the former Pope was willing to accept the plausibility of evolution (even if he was cautious about it) and the Bible itself tells us that life was brought forth from the waters of the ocean and from the earth. So why are the creationists so dead set on denouncing evolution?
At the end of the day, there are strong arguments on both sides. Yes, the idea of everything being created in six days is a little ludicrous but the Bible isn't meant to be taken literally; it's a guide-book for life, not the actual word of God (or Gods). At the same time, there are big gaps in the fossil records and evolution can't explain the most important question of all ... where did life come from?
An interesting side note to this whole debate concerns a group known as the Raelians. These people believe that life on earth was created by intelligent design but instead of God, they believe that we were put here by aliens. Most creationists have renounced this group as being crazy, but surely they're on the same side?
I don't think this debate is ever going to end, to be honest. It's been going on since long before the infamous Scopes Trial in 1925 and unless God (or the Elohim of Raelian myth) turn up one day to put the story straight, all three sides of the argument can be considered to be theory. They all explain most of the story but they all seem to fall down in one way or another. Maybe none of them are right. Or maybe they all are. I'll let you read the sources and make up your own mind.
Keep evolving Sleepsville. There is a light at the end of the tunnel.
Today, there's a story about this very argument on BBC News. Apparently, The Dover Area school board of Pennsylvania have made the teaching of the so-called intelligent design theory compulsory, while at the same time effectively removing evolution from the curriculum as unproven. In fact, this state of affairs (pardon the pun) seems to be quite prevailing in the USA, with over twenty states promoting the teaching of intelligent design as accepted fact.
Okay, let's look at both sides of the argument...
In his paper, The Origin Of The Species, Charles Darwin suggests that the diversity of life upon this planet is a direct result of the forces of evolution. Evolution works by the simple principle of "survival of the fittest" ... sort of. As mutations enter a given gene pool, those individuals with the most effective mutations live an easier or longer life, thereby propagating the mutation until it becomes a natural trait of the species in question. If you believe Darwin, then the reason we have ten digits, two eyes, a nose and all the component parts that we do is down to evolution. As the mutations increase, species split into individual breeds, and from there go on to form new species that either flourish and prosper or fail and die. Darwin used the fossil records at his disposal to classify and catalogue this process, effectively creating an evolutionary family tree for every living critter he could find. Her even went on a little cruise to examine the plants and animals in their native habitat. Scientific research suggests that this process (correctly labeled as a theory ... more about that in a bit) is ongoing, taking place all around us every day.
Creationists (people who believe in the intelligent design theory) hold with the Bible's account of where life came from. They say that gaps in the fossil record prove that Darwin's wrong, and that there is far too much diversity for it all to have happened Darwin's way, preferring instead the 'six days and a rest' approach used by God. Admittedly, there are those from within this camp who are willing to accept that evolution may have played a part in it somewhere but in most cases God did all the work and anybody who says otherwise is wrong.
To be honest, I'm surprised that this argument is still running. In the last hundred years or so, the fossil records have constantly been growing as new discoveries are made. In China, huge numbers of hitherto unknown prehistoric animals are being found almost on a daily basis, while in N. America the Utah Badlands still offer up a veritable cornucopia of ancient (long-dead) lifeforms. Even the biological history of the human race is being questioned regularly, and both schools of thought still continue to hold blindly to their own beliefs. Who's right and who's wrong?
Part of the problem stems from the fact that evolution is a theory. Now to most people the word theory is something that has been speculated but not proved. Unfortunately, that's actually a hypothesis, not a theory. A theory (in scientific terms, which is how it's used when applied to evolution) is a little more solid than that. According to dictionary.com, a theory is...
A set of statements or principles devised to explain a group of facts or phenomena, especially one that has been repeatedly tested or is widely accepted and can be used to make predictions about natural phenomena.
The important points here are that a theory explains "...a group of facts or phenomena..." and that it has usually been "...repeatedly tested or is widely accepted...". The theory of evolution has been studied, tested, re-evaluated and expounded upon repeatedly since Darwin, and the more strange and wonderful critters we dig up out of the ground, the more we understand that family tree that Darwin started.
The other problem is that evolution doesn't hold with the teachings of the Bible ... or does it?
In 1996, Pope John Paul II sent a message to the Pontifical Academy Of Sciences regarding this very subject, in which he accepts that "...the Encyclical Humani generis considered the doctrine of "evolutionism" a serious hypothesis, worthy of investigation..." For my own part, I simply turned to the Bible and re-read Genesis 1:11-26, where I discovered that every plant and animal was brought forth from either the ground or the sea. Now, I personally love the image of some omniprescient deity walking around and magically creating life but couldn't Genesis simply be another way of describing the evolution process. After all, even Darwin suggested that life originally came from the oceans. So in conclusion, the former Pope was willing to accept the plausibility of evolution (even if he was cautious about it) and the Bible itself tells us that life was brought forth from the waters of the ocean and from the earth. So why are the creationists so dead set on denouncing evolution?
At the end of the day, there are strong arguments on both sides. Yes, the idea of everything being created in six days is a little ludicrous but the Bible isn't meant to be taken literally; it's a guide-book for life, not the actual word of God (or Gods). At the same time, there are big gaps in the fossil records and evolution can't explain the most important question of all ... where did life come from?
An interesting side note to this whole debate concerns a group known as the Raelians. These people believe that life on earth was created by intelligent design but instead of God, they believe that we were put here by aliens. Most creationists have renounced this group as being crazy, but surely they're on the same side?
I don't think this debate is ever going to end, to be honest. It's been going on since long before the infamous Scopes Trial in 1925 and unless God (or the Elohim of Raelian myth) turn up one day to put the story straight, all three sides of the argument can be considered to be theory. They all explain most of the story but they all seem to fall down in one way or another. Maybe none of them are right. Or maybe they all are. I'll let you read the sources and make up your own mind.
Keep evolving Sleepsville. There is a light at the end of the tunnel.
Hiya Crum
Nice blog entry, good to see the new job isn't keeping you from posting.
I too am a little concerned with the latest educational stance regarding creation/evolution in America. I can only presume its because the american president is a man of religion, and so has a great influence in the teaching of these theories in schools. I also think this also has an influence in his decisions to fight the War on Terror, which seems to be a War on Islam (or non-Christians).
Anyway, on a lighter note have a butchers at http://www.venganza.org/index.htm. I first read this a long time ago, and made me chuckle. It makes a light hearted stab at saying if you're going to accept the theory of Intelligent Design as a plausable alternative, then who says there is only one version of Intelligent Design?
Take it easy
Ash
PS I think their explanation for global warming is quite profound and needs significant investigation. Especially since carbon dating is now totally useless...
Thanks, Mr A, for both the comments about the post and the link - had me in stitches, though I can't help wondering if it's connected to Maddox in some way...
But they have got it down in a nutshell ... teach all theories, give each one equal weight and allow the students to figure it out for themselves.
I also agree with your comment about the connection between the educational stance, GWB's own beliefs and the war on terror.
Anyhew, enough chin-wagging. I'm off to bed.
See ya later.
[Post a comment]