But science is about stepping stones: the creation of theories and hypothesis, and the testing of these hypotheses with empiricism. If these theories fail, then additional hypotheses have to be proposed. During the process of the testing these hypothesis, experimentalists will find evidence based that will enable to fine tuning of the hypothesis, and the process carries on. Indeed, most of quantum theory is hinged on the Uncertainty principle put forward by Werner Heisenberg. What apt that it be named the Uncertainty principle.
Eventually, one hopes that some consensus will come between those that support graduated equilibrium vs. phyletic gradualism in terms of evolution of species. Or a new theory will develop and come to the fore, if new fossil evidence comes to light. But that does not mean that we subscribe to the watchmaker theory. William Paley, an eighteenth century moral theorist, philosopher and religious conservative, was perhaps the first to propose a formal explanation for creationism, and made perhaps the first foray into Intelligent Design theory. Paley averred that a human being or other organisms on earth could be likened to a watch found in the desert. (VictorianWeb 2008) This watch had to be made by a creator and placed among the grains of sand. It was inconceivable that the winds and the sands had some one conspired to evolve into a working time piece over time.
The best debunking of Paley's ideation comes from the noted science fiction writer Isaac Asimov. Writing in one of the essays, in his collection titled "The Roving Mind," Asimov proposes a counter argument. He avers that most of us drive automobiles, but only few of have an understanding of the internal combustion engine and the complicated engineering systems that make a car go. But just because we don't know what makes a car run, does not mean that the car does not contain an engine....
He criticizes would be creationists by adding that a creationist would believe that a team of horses under the hood is what makes the car run. (Asimov 1983) strongly believe that evolution should be taught in schools as the current primary theory of evolution. But just as with all theories, the caveats, gaps, lack of experimental evidences should also be taught. It is a theory that provides the best explanation of speciation, but this does not mean that all scientific inquiry into the matter should cease. At the same time creationism and Intelligent Design merit a very brief mention, if nothing else to give students a world view of the different schools of thoughts out there. Intelligent Design is like an Indirect proof in Mathematics which starts out by believing the opposite is true and finds that since there is no (or little) evidence that supports this is an indication that opposite of what was first agued is true.
In conclusion therefore, I believe that the theories of evolution is fraught with errors and gaps that one day hopefully will be filled or replaced by a more universal theory that accounts for all the fossil evidence. And this is not a slight against those who believe that God created earth, based solely on solid faith. But to put a pseudo-scientific notion of Intelligent Design as an explanation for how we evolved is, and here I agree with the noted blogger Professor Glen Reynolds of Instapundit.com is "pernicious twaddle."
Asimov, Isaac. The Roving Mind. Buffalo, N.Y.: Prometheus Books, 1983.
Behe, Michael J., and T.D. Singh. God, Intelligent Design & Fine-Tuning. Kolkata: Bhaktivedanta Institute, 2005.
Brennan, S. Edwards, Governor of Louisiana, Et Al. V. Aguillard Et Al. 1987. UMKC. Available:
http://www.law.umkc.edu/faculty/projects/ftrials/conlaw/edwards.html. April19 2008.
Coulter, Ann H. Godless: The Church of Liberalism. 1st ed. New York: Crown Forum, 2006.
Dembski, William a. Intelligent Design: The Bridge between Science & Theology. Downers Grove, Ill.: InterVarsity Press, 1999.
Eldredge, and Gould. "Punctuated Equilibria: An Alternative to Phyletic Gradualism." Models in Paleobiology. Ed T.J. M Schopf. San Francisco: Freeman, Cooper and Co., 1972. 217-43.
Seward, a.C. Darwin and Modern Science; Essays in Commemoration of the Centenary of the Birth of Charles Darwin and of the Fiftieth Anniversary of the Publication of the Origin of Species. Cambridge,: University press, 1909.
Skjaerlund, David. Creation Column: Evolutionary Improbabilities. (n,.d.). Available:
http://forerunner.com/forerunner/X0728_Evolutionary_Improba.html. April19 2008.
Stamhuis, I.H., O.G. Meijer, and E.J. Zevenhuizen. "Hugo De Vries on Heredity, 1889-1903. Statistics, Mendelian Laws, Pangenes, Mutations." Isis 90.2 (1999): 238-67.
TalkOrigins. Kitzmiller V. Dover Area School District. 2005. TalkOrigins.org. Available:
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/dover/kitzmiller_v_dover_decision.html. April19 2008.
VictorianWeb. William Paley. 2008. University of California at Berkeley. Available:
http://www.ucmp.berkeley.edu/history/paley.html. April19 2008.
Evolution "Creational critics often charge that evolution cannot be tested, and therefore cannot be viewed as properly scientific subject at all. This claim is rhetorical nonsense" (Stephen Jay Gould). Human life is both sacred and mysterious. From time before recorded history, human beings, both scientific and religious have tried to determine what it is exactly that gives life and by extension, can take life away. In ancient times, most people believed that
Intelligent Design Man has always asked questions about how the world began. All cultures in the ancient world had origin myths. People looked to higher powers, or deities, or life forces, to explain what they could not understand. Researchers do not know where humankind's need for spirituality comes from, but it is clear, looking at history, that faith and the need to believe in something greater than ourselves are part of
It has been shown that from a very simple spot that is an eye -- "barely a light receptor" -- all the way up the evolutionary chain to a human eye's present day sophistication. As to the argument that the ID advocates make that the during the "Cambrian explosion" there suddenly appeared these species with "unprecedented complexity" -- in point of fact that so-called "explosion" during the Cambrian epoch took
Countless fossils and remnants of ancient limbs (such as the legs found on a dolphin recently) continue to back up the theory of how animals evolved from other forms of life and other kinds of bodies. For instance, whales and dolphins (proven by DNA to be related) have the vestiges of legs within their sleek bodies and their front "fins" have bones that correspond to human hands, rather than
In conclusion, perhaps we should heed the words of Charles Darwin himself who before his historic voyage aboard the H.M.S. Beagle between 1831 and 1836 was a devout Christian and creationist -- "There is a grandeur in this view of life. Whilst this planet has gone cycling on according to the fixed law of gravity, from so simple a beginning endless forms most beautiful and most wonderful have been and
" It is just as true today. There are still many things that cannot be explained by science. The appearance of design is as powerful today as it was over two thousand years ago. That is especially true of the living world. The more that geneticists and biologists study, the more it is seen that the living world exists with amazing complexity and sophistication. The cell is a perfect example. In Darwin's