Another day, another argument with a creationist. It’s amazing to me how political conservatism and theological conservatism (including rejection of evolution for theological reasons) often go hand-in-hand here in the United States, even though both are mutually exclusive subjects. Can’t one believe in low taxes and evolution simultaneously?
The creation/evolution debate has always entertained me, because the position of creationists relies upon evolution not being proven, ever, while the theory of evolution is supported by each and every new piece of evidence confirming the hypothesis. Thus, it has seemed to me for a long time that creationists have been in a potentially much weaker position, because any direct evidence of evolution that ever comes to light shatters their position in seconds (though I think realistically that happened a long time ago). Evidence which was offered up by evolutionists that was somewhat equivocal - or which merely added to the general corroboration pointing to evolution - didn’t end the debate as conclusively as it should have if science were the real focus of the debate by creationists.
If the debate should not have ended decades ago with the study of fossils, it should at least have ended more recently with the study of genetics.
A few years ago, genetics became a discipline capable of increasing our understanding of our own biology tremendously. With it came the promise that we would find some kind of direct evidence for evolution in the human genome. And that is precisely what has happened. Some time ago, I was introduced to the evidence for evolution in human chromosome #2. I was pointed to a talk by Ken Miller, who expressed amazement that the evidence hadn’t been more widely reported. It is, in effect, the smoking gun, the missing link. If nothing else is ever provided as evidence for evolution (and there is plenty), this is conclusive proof of the fact of evolution. From now on, I won’t even bother to talk about the age of the universe as proven in cosmology, astronomy, physics, geology. I won’t even take the trouble to talk about the problems with reading the Genesis account literally, or biblical exegesis. I will simply present the evidence of the fusion of two ancestral chromosomes in human chromosome #2.
For those who haven’t heard and want to hear about how evolution is proven by the study of human DNA, here’s Ken Miller to explain it. Let this end the debate.
I wish that the evidence from genetics would be enough but these people are immune. If God appeared and told them that he started the evolutionary process as part of his grand design, I think they would still pay no heed to the evidence. They are like those tone deaf people who go on shows like the X Factor totally convinced that they are amazing. Even when told how rubbish they are, the truth just does not register.
What is your opinion of people such as William F Buckley, David Berlinsky etc etc who are clearly intelligent people yet go around promoting Intelligent Design? I know that they are perhaps not overtly promoting creationism, but they seem to ignore the vast amount of evidence in favor of evolution. I find it genuinely puzzling. I suspect that Berlinsky is entirely disingenuous. He comes from the same mold as Ann Coulter, who knows that she talks total shit a lot of the time, but makes a killing doing so. But Buckley was a smart guy.
Joe, I often like these people on a ‘personal’ level, but I find their arguments intensely irritating as a theist, because they’re ignorant of a LOT of evidence suggesting the contrary of what they’re asserting. Not sure that it’s the money motivating them, but I do think the social bonds involved in religious practice make their associated beliefs very difficult to set down: losing friends and being rejected in the very social circles you rely upon for basic human interaction is a very good incentive to continue to ignore the evidence suggesting that the beliefs uniting the social group are actually bullshit.