James Watson, one of two men to win the Nobel Prize for genetic research, said in 1965, ìToday, the theory of evolution is an accepted fact for everyone but a fundamentalist minority, whose objections are based not on reasoning but on doctrinaire adherence to religious principles.” The fight against evolution is currently undertaken not by scientists but by religious advocates who claim their ideas of creationism and its offspring intelligent design provide a more concrete answer to defining nature.
The most heated discussion among modern scientific achievements, the theory of evolution underwent infinite tests and forced the collection of tons of data. Remarkably, a majority of America still does not accept the evidence for the origin of our species, and this is a problem.
This article is not attempting to prove the theory of evolution, which is similar to arguing the theory of gravity. Nor is this article trying to convince people their religion is wrong, as accepting evolution does not mean a disbelief in God. This article solely argues for advancing the position that not believing in a verified, scientific theory hurts society, insults science and gives a misrepresented view of the world.
The main difference between evolution and creationism lies within the method of obtaining the outcomes. Evolution stems from science, which takes data and forms a conclusion based on it. The solution to halting the SARS virus came from looking at the evolution of similar viruses and creating antibodies to counter the deadly disease. Creationism takes a conclusion that, in its simplest form, a higher power created all the species of the world ó it then uses data to prove the preexisting conclusion. This latter method is not scientific and therefore unacceptable to argue against a scientific claim. By presenting religious claims as scientific, schools which teach creationism are not only violating the separation of church and state, but misleading children as to what constitutes science.
Last year, the National Academy of Sciences released a book titled Science, Evolution and Creationism to promote understanding the theory in the U.S. The Academy consists of some 200 Nobel Prize winning scientists, and provides information directly to the federal government. Yet the efforts of these men and women are seemingly thrown to the side, disregarded and slighted.
Last February, on the anniversary of Charles Darwinís birthday, only 39 percent of Americans acknowledged the theory of evolution. This compares to a little higher than 80 precent for the countries of France and Sweden, with Japan and the U.K. just south of that number.
Opponents of evolution, including young and old earth creationists as well as intelligent design advocates, make claims† attempting to discredit years of research, stemming from either misinformation or deliberate manipulation of the facts. Claims such as, ìThere are too many gaps in the fossil record to actually believe in evolution” fall short when scientists discover fossils every year which further the evidence and explain more and more.
Many people try to turn evolution as an attack against religion for this reason. This is not the case. Although almost all atheists accept evolution, many religious people accept it as well. Francis Collins, the director of the National Human Genome Project, says, ìThere is no conflict in being a rigorous scientist and a person who believes in a God who takes a personal interest in each one of us. Scienceís domain is to explore nature. Godís domain is in the spiritual world.”
There are several other scientists who believe in a god (even some on the National Academy) and still acknowledge the importance of evolution. The Catholic Churchís official stance even accepts the plausibility of evolution with God still in the picture (called theistic evolution).
Many of those who deny evolution perform unacceptable acts which harm the freedoms of others in our society.† People such as Tom Willis, a main proponent of removing evolution and other scientific lessons from Kansas schools, believe evolutionists shouldnít even vote.
The Creation Museum, located a mere three hours from here, shows animatronic dinosaurs living amongst people and argues the great flood caused the movement of the continents instead of plate tectonics. An evangelical group named Living Waters will be passing out Darwinís The Origin of Species this fall to over a hundred universities with special introductions that portray Darwin as a racist and compare the theory of evolution to the Holocaust.
The Supreme Court case Epperson v Arkansas (1968) ruled banning evolution in public schools is illegal under the Establishment Clause. Contrastingly, in the 1960s the federally supported Biological Sciences Curriculum Study (BSCS) released books which several churches fought (and still fight) to be removed from schools because the books teach evolution. Federal actions are being challenged because of a denial of evolution, and consequently children are being denied the best textbooks the government can give. This limiting of education due to creationism is immoral.
What is happening here is a dilemma of free speech. Yes, America is a country where you can say and believe what you want.
Yet if you distort the data, refuse to acknowledge the findings of your countryís most intelligent, and preach a lie to the uneducated children of America, then a line has been crossed. The United States has banned creationism from public schools, and for good reason. Denying evolution promotes intolerance and hinders the expansion of the human mind.
John McGovern is a regular contributor for the Voice. He can be reached for comment at JMcGovern12@wooster.edu.