Wednesday, April 21, 2004

Misinformation rife in creationism vs. evolution

Could it be that doctor Jeremy Conley has finally discredited the largely mystical and undoubtedly nonscientific theories of evolution? Will a much deserved Nobel Prize finally fall upon Fayette County, Georgia?

Not hardly, unless of course the will of Alfred Nobel secretly awards a sixth Nobel prize for greatest achievement in misinformation.

What Conley so valiantly attempts to discredit throughout his muddled argument is not entirely evolution, but moreover, a mere facet of evolution’s earliest chapters, the origin of life.

The idea that one paradigm for creation contradicts the other is a shallow platitude steeped in ignorance towards both models.

The Big Bang has never attempted to disprove any notion of an overarching creator, but rather redefines God through physics, making circular what once was flat.

Ultimately, science is itself a religion whose dogmas are constantly critiqued rather than established for permanency without want for critical examination.

That the Big Bang has become a threat to church doctrine is an absurdity, the idea itself being a product of Christianity.

In 1927, Belgian Catholic priest and MIT astrophysicist, Georges LeMaitre, introduced a revolutionary physics theory concerning the movement of the universe; two years later, his theory was dubbed “Big Bang” after Edwin Hubble’s dramatic discovery unintentionally provided physical evidence for LeMaitre.

That the Big Bang contradicts religious text is also a deeply-rooted fallacy held constant by fundamentalists and people either lacking the ability or desire to discern the allegorical from the literal.

While it is obvious that ancient man did not understand nature as we do today, his basic philosophical themes have transcended culture and age virtually unadulterated, and form the basis for today’s most innovative scientific endeavors.

Jeremy Conley proves an excellent subject in modeling the extent to which the masses poorly understand the concepts of evolution, and further illustrates the dangers of misinformation. Regretfully, many readers are attracted to the ostensible scientific validity of Conley’s argument and easily accept a scientific façade that defends their own fundamentalism.

A simple trip to the dictionary, however, could easily dispel Conley’s warped definition of evolution as something requiring “that life happens by itself, by chance.”

How Conley derived his definition of evolution is a linguistic adventure unto itself. Any seeming validity in Conley’s argument stems from ill-conceived logic infused with snips of scientific fact that have long since been removed from their original context.

Primarily, however, it relies on a name-dropping of famed scholars and scientists to instill confidence in the argument. The notion that “evolutionists deny that life had a designer” contradicts the very practice of evolutionary science, particularly the study of particle physics.

In other words, how could any true evolutionist possibly negate the idea of a creator/designer when the nature of their science aims entirely to better understand the creation, design, and structure of life?

That being said, how best can I explain evolution in a concise, accessible, and accurate manner? Perhaps by way of a metaphor or historical parable. Nay, we tried that once with an old book and look where it got us. You see, evolution narrates the history of mankind, tracing him to his very origin.

Like it or not, man’s origin lies in eastern Africa, in the Afar region of Ethiopia to be precise. Now before you reach for your xenophobic symbol of choice, allow me this: We need not explore any further than our own race and ethnicity to evidence evolution both physically and culturally.

The visible characteristics of race are the portraits of evolutionary adaptation and there is nothing cryptic about evolutionary processes. Those who criticize or even dismiss evolution more often than not fail to comprehend the slow, quiet nature of this biological process over vast years of time.

At risk of oversimplifying evolution, I shall defer proper explanation to the experts by means of suggested readings. A good starter kit could include: “Asimov’s Chronology of the World” and “Asimov’s Guide to the Bible”; “Guns, Germs, and Steel,” the writings of Dr. Cheikh Anta Diop; and any readings that provide a general understanding of geology, anthropology, and particle physics. I conclude with the words of Percy B. Shelley: “The more we study, the more we discover our ignorance.”

Alejandro Crawford

Fayetteville, Ga.