, , , , ,

This post is a sort of continuation of my previous post about why evolution and belief do not have to stand in contrast with each other. I just found a great post that refutes many arguments that creationists use against evolution. I encourage you to read the whole post, but this is the short version of
The top 10 signs that you don’t understand evolution at all
by Tyler Francke:

1. You think "it hasn’t been observed" is a good argument against it.
— many experiments have made and (successfully) tested predictions of the theory, plus the same argument is also a good argument against G-d.

2. You think we’ve never found a transitional fossil.
— there are links in the article to just such fossils [as I am no expert in the field and haven’t followed the links I cannot really say more about this].

3. You think macroevolution is an inherently different process than microevolution.
— macroevolution is just the accumulation of small changes (i.e., microevolution).

4. You think mutations are always negative.
— they are not, most are neutral, some are both, some are positive.

5. You think it has anything to do with the origin of life, let alone the origins of the universe.
— it assumes life exists and then says something about how it develops, how it came into being is a very different story.

6. You use the phrase "it’s only a theory" and think you’ve made some kind of substantive statement.
— the use of the word "theory" in science actually distinguishes a confirmed explanation of facts from "hypothesis" (what your normal person means when he says "I have a theory how he stole my purse").

7. You think acceptance of evolution is the same as religious faith.
— people are not blindly believing one person, they are believing what is scientific consensus in a group of highly competitive people who have spend years of investigation on it.

8. You think our modern understanding of it rests on a long series of hoaxes perpetuated by scientists.
— scientists are actually the ones to find the occasional errors, misunderstandings and wrong conclusions other scientists make, it has (in the vast majority of cases, not counting a few black sheep) nothing to do with intentionally misleading everybody.

9. You don’t like Pokémon because you think it "promotes" evolution.
— WTF?

10. You think it’s inherently opposed to Christianity or the Bible.
— the error is in the interpretation.

I am especially allergic to people who misunderstand the use of the word "theory" in a scientific context (point 6) or how the scientific process works (points 1 and 8). I would add to point 5 that how/whether G-d interfers in evolution is another very different story. Point 10 is here presented from a Christian point of view, but in the end I would agree that there need not (and should not) be a conflict between science and faith. The Torah is written in the language of man, we do not have to take everything literally. And even if a certain part has been taken literally until now, in the face of new evidence we can say that we have learned only now that G-d did not intend us to take it literally. This does not in any way negate G-d’s existence or my belief in Him. (In some cases it might force me to re-evaluate some religious teachings or even halachot, but that is part of the process of halacha, it is not static but is applied to our contemporary issues.)