Subject: evolution-vs-creationism in the classrooms (today's NYT)
Date: Aug 15 11:43:12 1999
From: Don Baccus - dhogaza at pacifier.com


At 11:26 AM 8/15/99 -0700, Deborah Wisti-Peterson wrote:

>Educators and scientists may find it shocking or merely tedious that
>politicians are still fighting over whether evolution should be taught in
>school. But those who champion scientific over religious explanations
>might strengthen their case if they conceded a point to the opposition:
>Since evolution is indeed a theory and not a fact

Evolution IS fact, and has been observed, even speciation. The
factual existence of evolution is one of the thorniest problems
for "creation science", which has frequently redefined the Biblical
notion of "kind" to include observed evolution (as "microevolution")
and exclude evolution between "kinds" ("macroevolution"). It used to
be that "kinds" were species, but that doesn't work any more given the
data.

The author is making a common mistake. The theory of evolution
is our best explanation for the fact of evolution, much as current
theories in physics are our best current explanation for certain
observable facts such as the existence of the gravitational force.

The existence of evolution is not a theory, and no honest scientist
could ever make the concession suggested by the author.

I'm curious about one thing: what happens to the debate once it's
realized that genetic engineers can create new species at will?

Does that demean special creation? "God's not that special, after
all we can make new species anytime we want, and it doesn't even
take us seven days to do it!"

How will fundamentalists deal with this issue?



- Don Baccus, Portland OR <dhogaza at pacifier.com>
Nature photos, on-line guides, Pacific Northwest
Rare Bird Alert Service and other goodies at
http://donb.photo.net.