Evolution
I am pleased to say that, for the most part, the people I call my friends are fairly sane. Most of them have a decent level of intelligence, whether that’s gained from years of education or just having some good old fashioned common sense. However, I am always left in a state of incredulity when someone I know – and regard with some level of intelligence – starts spouting anti-evolution nonsense.
OK, maybe you’re picking up a hint of bias here. Yes, I am a believer the findings of scientists like Darwin and Dawkins. I find the whole subject incredibly interesting and follow it with enthusiasm as the theory itself evolves. So, when I hear the strange and often pathetically ignorant arguments against evolutionary theory, it always gets my blood boiling.
The argument always starts in the same way.
“Well, it’s only a THEORY, so you can’t claim that it’s actually true!”
At this point, it not full-on anger that I feel. It’s more of a pitying, patronizing feeling of … “Oh, the poor thing. It’s so stupid. I should try to enlighten it!”
And so, I’ll start with an attempt at explaining that the word “theory” has more than one meaning. In the same way that “bad” can be used to mean two very different things, the word “theory” does not always refer to it’s most commonly known definition.
In conversational English, “theory” means the following:
“Contemplation or speculation, a guess or conjecture. An untested idea or opinion.”
This definition is perfectly valid and is the one used in every day speech. For example, in a conspiracy theory such as “Princess Diana’s death was orchestrated by the Royal Family”. It’s a statement or an opinion which has little or no basis in fact. Of course Diana wasn’t killed by the Royal Family. But the conjecture put forward by some people is rightly defined as a “theory“.
This is NOT the definition applied to the word when used in Science. Evolutionary Theory is NOT an untested idea or opinion and it contains NO conjecture or speculation. The scientific definition goes like this:
“A body of principles, theorems, or the like, belonging to one subject. Or an explanation accounting for known facts or phenomena.”
The term “Evolutionary Theory” is used as a banner or title for the KNOWN FACTS about evolution. It’s not a case of “here’s what we think – believe it if you like!“. It’s a case of “Here are the facts that we have observed, all collected together.” So, it becomes obvious to anyone with more than two active brain cells that to claim you don’t “BELIEVE” in evolution is a complete nonsense. You may as well say you don’t believe in gravity, or … I dunno, badgers! Everything that Evolutionary Theory talks about is fact. There is no guess work here!
So, to claim your disbelief in Evolution is ignorant on three counts.
First, you are passing opinion on a theory without knowing what the word “theory” means.
Second, you are dismissing a set of observed scientific facts as speculation and opinion.
However, most importantly, you are passing judgement on a collection of facts that you either have not spent the time to research or simply don’t have the capacity to understand.
I firmly believe in that if you don’t agree with Evolutionary Theory, then you haven’t understood it. It’s not there to be agreed with. At the risk of repeating myself, I’ll state once more that it is a collection of observed facts.
Of course, much of the anti-evolution is brought forward by people on the side of religion. People that firmly believe that religion and evolution are two completely irreconcilable concepts. Another point of view that I do not share, but that’s a different rant.
The reason I bring up religion at all is that there is a fundamental flaw in the main argument brought forward by many religious people when it comes to evolution, and I feel the need to explore it …
It may seem like I am casually dismissing everyone that doesn’t agree with the theory as an idiot but that’s not the case. If someone brings new information or an intelligent argument forward, I’m happy to listen and debate. As long as there is basis in fact, the argument is valid. In fact, the defining difference between Science and faith is that Science is always ready to accept new information and adapt it’s view to incorporate it. And this is where the main religious-person argument falls down.
I’m often told that my “belief” in evolution is just the same as their faith … and that my refusal to go along with their faith is a classic case of closed-mindedness. Do they not see the hypocracy in this outrageous statement?
Their faith has no factual basis.
In fact, by definition, there can be no factual basis in their faith, otherwise it would no longer BE “faith“. Faith is defined as “belief that is not based on proof“. So don’t compare my KNOWLEDGE of the FACTS of evolution to your belief in a man or an entity whose existance is only backed up by fiction!
Science is many things, but closed-minded it is NOT. Every day, new information is incorporated into scientific theories. These facts change the beliefs of the scientific community, as to ignore any new findings would be illogical and indefensible. Conversely, whenever new information is presented to the religious community, it is them that routinely insist on ignoring it. Faith is the denial of fact so that a fiction can be upheld. Surely, THIS is the closed-minded group here.
I don’t want to make this an anti-religion rant. I have no right to criticize anyone’s beliefs. That is not the point I’m making here. However, Evolution is not an optional belief system for you to choose to accept or not. Stating your disbelief in a proven fact serves no purpose but to reveal your own ignorance. The information is readily available in books and on the web. Would it really hurt you to take a proper look at it?
MisterShouty 