> Michael Behe
> William Dembski
> Guillermo Gonzalez
> Steve Meyer
> Paul Nelson
> Jay Richards
> Jonathan Wells
> Jonathan Witt



Send an email to us at:
idthefuture@discovery.org



> The ID Debate at Utah Valley State College This Friday (Dec 1)
> Not by chance: From bacterial propulsion systems to human DNA, evidence of intelligent design is everywhere
> DNA and Other Designs
> In That Stack of Papers, A Quiet Revolution
> Great...now aliens will NEVER visit Earth.
> The Design Revolution - Chapter 33: Design by Elimination or Design by Comparison
> Michael Ruse, Crossdresser
> Design & Evolution in the Big Easy: Loyola University New Orleans President's Forum on ID Next Week
> Thomas Nagel Critiques Dawkins: The Design-Cannot-Possibly-Be-True Argument
> The Hits Just Keep on Coming

Dotted Divider Line

« Miami New Times--Jewish Leaders Debate Intelligent Design | Main | Intelligent Design Makes Empirically Testable Predictions »

Icons of Evolution: A Response to Critics--Conclusion

A colleague suggested I post in several installments my past response to critics of Icons of Evolution. The series begins here, which includes the full reviewer citations.

TO BELIEVE, OR DISBELIEVE?
I believe in Darwinian evolution as the natural counterpart of domestic breeding--that is, as an explanation for limited changes within existing species. I confess, however, that I do not believe in Darwinian evolution as a general explanation for the origin and diversification of all living things.

If my disbelief is due to ignorance, it’s only because I did not learn an “investigative tradition” that manipulates statistics to prove something that is clearly false. And if my disbelief is due to stupidity, it’s only because I do not grasp the “evidential value” of using evolutionary theory to explain away evidence that doesn’t support it.

So, am I wicked? If Darwinian evolution (as a general explanation for the origin and diversification of all living things) were true, then maybe it would be wicked of me to reject it. But how can we know whether Darwinian evolution is true? In science, the truth or falsity of a theory is ultimately determined by comparing it with the evidence--not by affirming the theory in spite of the evidence, and not by attacking people who dare to doubt it.

The case is now before the jury. The jury includes honest, hard-working scientists who imbibed evolution from their textbooks but who haven’t thought much about it since, because it’s irrelevant to their research. The jury includes the roughly 90% of Americans who don’t believe in Darwinism but who are forced to pay for its domination of our educational system anyway. And--most importantly--the jury includes students, the vast majority of whom (according to the polls) want to hear both sides of the growing controversy over Darwin’s theory. The jury may be swayed for a while by prejudiced reviews published in prestigious science journals, or by increasingly ugly attempts at character assassination. Ultimately, however, the jury will decide the case based on the scientific evidence.

After all, nothing in biology--not even evolution!--makes sense except in the light of evidence.

TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.discovery.org/scripts/mt/mt-tb.cgi/285