Open Letter to Kansas school authorities about intelligent design. The question he asks - quite rightly - is this "If we are going to teach a theory of intelligent design based on arbitrary religious beliefs, whose arbitrary beliefs shall we choose?"
A lot of this whole problem is people confusing semantics. Despite what a lot of people will insist, "evolution" is, in fact, still a theory, not to be confused with its pillar of "natural selection," which is scientifically proven fact.
ReplyDeleteFor example, we've seen birds, cats, monkeys, etc, all take on new characteristics and develop into different species. That's natural selection within a phylum. However, there is still no verifiable evidence of any phylum actually developing INTO another phlyum (e.g., an amphibian in the process of evolving into a lizard), which is the assumption of evolution.
Despite a century of searching for something to validate Darwin's reasoned leap once and for all, the fossil record is incredibly empty of these "transitional" organisms (even the archyopteryx has since been shown to be pure bird and not a dinosaur-bird hybrid, but even if it were, one example out of the millions of species to ever have roamed the earth is not a great track record).
The tug-of-war between creationists and evolutionists has devolved into what it is in part due to evolutionists being overzealous in their desire to (wrongly) elevate a perfectly reasonable theory into an end-all, be-all counter to religious belief.