This is a huge topic and I wouldn’t even begin to think that we could cover the whole thing on this humble little webpage but perhaps sharing our ideas about the Evolution debate would be interesting. Note that what follows is my opinion and I welcome criticism to it.
I was watching a documentary in my philosophy lesson today about some fossils found in kenya which experts believe are fossils of common ancestors of humans and apes, dated 6 million years ago. The program went on to explain the evidence for it etc. but a few things struck me. Firstly how all the scientists on that program didn’t even consider the fact that evolution may not be true, it was just blatant fact, in the same way that the earth revolves around the sun is fact or that gravity exists. Why then, do some people accept what the scientists say about gravitational theory because it does not conflict with their beliefs, but they will not accept the evidence for evolution because it does conflict with their beliefs?
The evidence for evolution is pretty much solid. Natural selection can and has been observed many times since Darwin first put forward his theory and since then, an overwhelming amount of evidence has been discovered which supports the theory. On what basis then, does a theist, who is not an expert in the field of paleontology or evolutionary theory, say that evolution is “just a theory” and as acceptable as the Creation story which has no scientific evidence and only one flimsy documentary “evidence” contained within the Bible.
How can a theist justify the Creation story as a valid explanation for the world when he will rubbish evolution theory because it is not proven. Ok, so evolution isn’t proven in the way that 2+2=4 can be proven, but then NO science can be proven but that doesn’t stop you accepting that the benzene ring contains a resonating loop of electrons. You have never observed it but yet you accept it without question because it does not conflict with your beliefs.
Evolution does not disprove God, and when someone advocates evolution, they are not attempting to disprove God. That is the difference between a scientist and a theist. A scientist is out to find the truth about the universe while the theist is trying to fit in new discoveries with an already established set of rules which themselves have no scientific or historical evidence but rather are based on an irrational belief system.
My aim is not to rubbish religion because just as there is no evidence for God, there is no evidence for not God and so I would not be so bold (at this point) as to say there is no God. But our lives are dominated by science and we accept things far more dubitable than evolution theory without even batting an eyelid. Why then, has evolution become such huge issue among theists that in some states in America, Creation and Evolution are being taught as equally acceptable theories in school. It makes a mockery of all the scientific work that has been done on evolution and is spitting in the face of logic, reason and rationality which dominate our lives.
Evolution, for me, is an inescapable fact. It happened. Just as the world is round, we have evolved from a common ancestor through the process of natural selection. I find that a lot of the arguments against evolution come from a misunderstanding of it’s implications and the mechanistics of how it works. Theist propaganda will attempt to give scientific evidence against evolution including missing links in the geological column etc. all of which can and have been answered many times over. If you do not believe then feel free to put forward an argument which you feel totally disproves evolution theory. If then, you wish to join in the scientific debate then I would ask you to put forward one shred of evidence to support the story of Creation.
So, I open up the debate for opinion, criticism and scientific evidence…enjoy!
