Recently, the article on 12 September 2007 titled "The Flaws of Carbon Dating" has attracted a lot of pro and anti-evolutionary arguments. To help us clarify the controversey is, we invited our editor (defensedefumer), who is currently studying biology at university level to explain. Our interviewer is ex-actor Torch;D, whose knowledge of science is second-hand and sketchy.
Note: The transcript has been edited to for this blog (because we use pseudonyms).
Torch;D: Hello boss!
defensedefumer: Hello, Torch;D! It's great to see you once again.
(Some light-hearted chit-chatter)
Torch;D: Ok boss, I got a job to do, and I have a few questions about evolution and intelligent design. What is evolution? Keep it simple for the ex-actor here.
defensedefumer: There are many definitations, but the simplest and yet accurate one would be the change of the genetic material of one population of organisms to from one generation to the next generation.
Torch;D: What is intelligent design then?
defensedefumer: Well, admittedly there has not really been clear definitation to my knowledge yet, but a safe bet would be that certain features of the universe and biological systems are best explained by an intelligent cause.
Torch;D: There does not seem to be a conflict; they both seem pretty ok to me.
defensedefumer: I know, it sounds peaceful right? But intelligent design insists that natural selection, a mechanism of evolution cannot produce complex biologoical systems like the eye, or the bacterial motor, known as flagellum.
Torch;D: I know this sounds elementary, but what is natural selection?
defensedefumer: To simpify it, it is the process in which heritable traits make incresases the survivalibility of organisms to reach reproductive age to be more common over generations.
Torch;D: The survival of the fittest?
defensedefumer: More accurately, the survival of the fit enough. As long as a heritable genetic trait that enables a organism to survive long enough to reproduce, it's natural selection.
Torch;D: What is the mechanism for intelligent desgin, then?
defensedefumer (pauses for a moment to think): Irreducible complexity. To put it simply, if something is too complex to be evolved, it must have been abruptly 'designed' there.
Torch;D: I don't see a problem with that.
defensedefumer: The problem is that it is not science! Science seeks naturalistic explainations for naturalistic events. It's an argument from ignorance-- I can't see how something is done, therefore God must have did it. That's bad science.
Torch;D: But you are Christian, aren't you?
defensedefumer: Yes, I am. But evolution is not atheisitc-- like any science, it is areligion! It does not care if you believe in a God or not. It just seeks naturalistic causes. God is supernatural, and outside science.
Torch;D: Isn't evolution just a theory?
defensefumer: The word "theory" is very different in scientific language from English-- it represents a higher understanding of the facts availible. So, yes it is a theory in a way that it best explains the facts we have, and also a fact as accepted by mainstream scientists. Don't get me wrong, I believe in an intelligent designer, but that's not what intelligent design is.
Torch;D: Isn't evolution unobservable?
defensdefumer: It is. There's nylon-digesting bacteria, human chromosome 2 and the fossil evidence.
Torch;D: So I see. Thanks for your time.
defensedefumer: A pleasure! I have some books to recommend if you're interested. "Finding Darwin's God" and "Monkey Girl" are good books to start!
(End of transcript)
Torch;D
The Alternative: Reporting theories and facts.
No comments:
Post a Comment