Evolution, Science or Fiction?

Creation Science. Intelligent Design. Hokum? Science? Religion?

Watching the 1960 classic, Inherit the Wind, we cheer while Spencer Tracey attacks William Jennings Bryan, portraying him as backward and silly. Even though the actual trial occurred a mere 35 years earlier, somehow it had to be ancient history. Could people really have been that parochial in modern times? Well,

In 2005, the Scopes trial was replayed in Dover Pennsylvania. The Dover school board mandated that a 4-paragraph dissertation describing “Intelligent Design” as an alternative to evolution be presented in science classrooms. A number of teachers protested. Eleven parents filed suit against the school board through the ACLU for violation of their children’s civil rights. Click here for a transcript of the trial.

Actually, Scopes lost the 1925 case. But in 1987, in Edwards vs. Aguillard, the U. S. Supreme Court struck down “Scopes” and ruled that “Creationism” could not be taught in public schools. The Dover school board argued that Intelligent Design (I/D) is not “Creationism”, but a scientific field of study.

The case was heard by Judge John E. Jones, a Republican and George W. Bush appointee, and came down to the pivotal question: Is “Intelligent Design” science or religion? In a six-week trial the Thomas More Law Center (“The Sword and Shield for People of Faith”) defended the school board, with The Discovery Institute, the Seattle firm that coined the phrase ("Intelligent Design"), weighing in with “intellectual” support.

In the face of resistance from teachers, students and ultimately the board itself, the two members of the board who sponsored this measure secured a “text book” called Of Pandas and People for students who wished to pursue the claim. Fifty copies of the book had been “donated” by a benefactor, but were actually procured by the two board sponsors, who lied under oath to cover their involvement.

After 21 days of testimony Judge Jones found I/D’s case for science insubstantial and ruled against the school board. (Actual) intelligence prevailed in a small, Pennsylvania town in pursuit of a decent education for children in the face of a large population of religious dogmatists.

Robbinsence has condensed the argument for our readers’ consideration.

What is Science?
Science is the systematic study of natural phenomena.
The “scientific method” is to extrapolate a hypothesis to explain natural phenomena, leaving the theory to be disproved by the scientific community. It is important here to emphasize that the procedure is to disprove the theory---not to prove it. (It’s assumed that there is enough empirical evidence to advance the material as a theory, but “proof” is beyond the purview of science.) In order to qualify as “science”, a hypothesis must stand up to an effort to disprove it, and there must be a scientific manner by which to test it.

Christians who promote various theories of biology that fail to conform to evolutionary paradigms claim that their theory (under whatever name might be in fashion) is true. While it’s conceivable that their vision is in fact reality, this is not science. I/D advocates devote considerable energy to disproving evolution, leaving NO discernable body of research to explore their own theory, much less to try to disprove it. No one has yet arrived at a systematic or "scientific" manner to test or disprove God.

The “theory” of evolution, as proposed by Charles Darwin, in his treatise: On the Origin of Species, has survived 150 years of scrutiny. The entire science of “genetics”, which was beyond Darwin’s imagination, serves only to validate his far-reaching insight.

While Christians emphasize the “theory” aspect of the controversy, evolution is accepted by the scientific community as fact. There are a number of theories as to the driving mechanism behind evolution, including “natural selection” and “punctuated equilibrium”, but evolution is an accepted “scientific fact”. Note here the distinction between “fact” and “truth”. Science does not deal in “truth” or “reality”. It does not contend that The Big Bang theory, for example, is reality. But while reality is beyond the scope of science, it is the essence of religion. Christianity, applying its own system of “logic”, asserts that its description of nature is “the truth”, with The Bible is its body of “research”. This is not science.

While science deals with exploration of the unknown, religion is an exercise in basking in the “known” (the presumed). The two fields are virtual opposites. Exploring the unknown, requires an open mind and is sabbotaged by pre-conception. But by their own admission, I/D has no body of research, no actual “scientific methodology” at work in their pursuit of the truth. In fact, there’s no effort within the movement to expand knowledge about anything. “Inside” memos generated by the Discovery Institute and presented in the trial revealed that by their own admission, I/D “methodology” consists of “a bag of powerful intuitions” and “a handful of notions such as ‘irreducible complexity’”.

The argument over science or religion is a discussion on apples or oranges. They are too different to compare.

The closing chapter of the Dover trial has Judge Jones and his family put on 24-hour armed protection because of numerous death threats from good, sanctimonious Christians who didn’t like his verdict. The fact that these hateful, violent people have descended from the teachings of Jesus would be ample evidence of evolution in itself.


Next month: Who, or what, is God?