Deniers of Science By Richard Sale

 

A critic of Evolution thundered recently: “Scientific observations do not support biological evolution! What about the icons of evolution that have been presented in textbooks for almost 50 years? Don’t these icons support biological evolution? Some of these do show microevolution within species. This type of evolution, even if it permanently points in one direction, is not evolution. It is no more evolution than dog breeding.”  (What???) “However, if a dog could be bred into a cat, that would be evolution. Even icons like the peppered moths that were only examples of microevolution, used pinned dead moths on black tree trunks that were not a natural resting place for the moths. Hackle’s embryos, ape-to-man drawings, the horse series, etc.” 

The above is taken from a site urging the teaching of Creationism as an alternative to Evolution. That these words are incoherent are not the worst of their faults. Unfortunately, these remarks leave the question of evolution validity or falsehood. Not only are they erroneous, they are misconceived.  

 

A fundamentalist reading of the Bible leads to all sorts of nonsense.  In the 19^th century, there occurs a belief in the spontaneous life. At one time, people maintained that the sun created crocodiles from the mud of the Nile. Mice were supposed to be created out of piles of old soiled rags.  Bluebottle flies had their origin in bad meat. Maggots were created in apples, which is why they at last appeared. U.S. fundamentalists believe this as well. They do think that the earth is only 6,000 years old. 

Alas, Louisiana, Tennessee and other states, clearly striving to be in the forefront of every backward movement, are increasing funding for the teaching of “Creationism” in schools there, demonstrating their support for this falsehood by  thumping their cave man’s clubs or perhaps enacting animal sacrifices. The problem is that the advocates of Creationism are spiritual and mental primitives. They haven’t evolved at all. 

The Creationist folks clearly don’t understand that Evolution is not really a controversy anymore. Evolution is no longer a theory because the debate has long ago moved from biology to chemical analysis. The building up of chemical molecules defines our Life’s beginning. What we have learned from scientists since Darwin is that the cycles of life have a chemical form. Scientists had to do much selfless work to learn how to express the cycles of life in a way that linked them to nature as a whole, and this meant studying chemistry. That’s what the Bible believers get wrong. 

In other words, scientific knowledge has moved way, way beyond Alfred Russel (sic) Wallace, and Darwin and Mendel. The blood that flows in our veins is millions and millions of years old. The history of the Earth is interesting to the point of fascination, but the man who solved the mystery of life’s earliest origins was the Frenchman Louis Pasteur who proved the chemical basis of all human life back in 1863, when the French Emperor asked him to solve the question of why wine went bad. Pasteur solved this in two years.  He discovered that the wine was a “sea of organisms.”  He said, “By some it lives, by some it decays.”  What was the most startling of his discoveries was that life could exist without oxygen. He found that no free oxygen existed before Life existed. 

After Pasteur, it was chemists, not biologists that began to look at amino acids as the building blocks of human life. When anyone of us moves his or her arm, we rely on something called myogiblin which consists of 120 amino acids. The difference in amino acids between a chimpanzee and a human is a small difference. But between a human and a sheep, the difference of amino acids is much greater. Yet the overwhelming conclusion about our life’s origins is that they have their base in chemistry, in molecules that can replicate. Basic molecules form DNA chains, etc. In fact, our life is controlled by four bases of DNA. 

The Earth’s Beginnings 

It is perhaps chastening to note that by 8 billion years ago, about two thirds of the history of our universe passed, and it had passed before the creation of the Earth which took place around 4.6 billion years ago. It was around 4.6 billion years ago that a mass the size of Mars crashed into the Earth at 25,000 miles per hour. There was a huge amount of dust that circled us, but our gravity held on to it and out of that dust the Moon was formed. I believe that it was the moon that gave us 24 hour days and seasons. (A lot of the above is still being refined and debated, so please be patient with my mistakes.)  So we humans were born out of chaos, collisions, ice ages, volcanic eruptions, and the like. No wonder we are so quarrelsome. 

Scientists returned to the beginning, asking, what was the surface of the Earth and what was our atmosphere like? From my own fitful reading, I discovered from reading was that the atmosphere of the Earth was originally a mixture of steam, nitrogen, carbon dioxide, ammonia, methane, but no free oxygen. A great step forward occurred in 1952 or thereabouts, thanks to a scientist named Steven Miller, who, with a colleague named Harold Urey, bottled up in a flask what they guessed was the Earth’s original atmosphere. Theirs was an experiment intended to simulate the conditions thought at the time to be present on the early Earth, and the experiment tested for the occurrence of our chemical origins of life. Specifically, the experiment tested Alexander Oparin's and J. B. S. Haldane's hypothesis that conditions on the primitive Earth favored chemical reactions that “synthesized organic compounds from inorganic precursors.”  (This language for me is a bit like tramping through a dense thicket in the woods and getting lost, but it is interesting nonetheless.) 

So Miller bottled up nitrogen, water, methane, ammonia, water, carbon dioxide, and other reducing gases. The mixture turned pink within a day. For days he and Urey subjected their flask to heat, to ultra-violet light, loud noises, trying to simulate the chaotic fury of the Earth’s original atmosphere. This went on for some time, maybe weeks. Suddenly as Miller and Urey looked on, they saw that the pink liquid had suddenly darkened. Their experiment had produced basic amino acids, rudimental protein.  The experiment was seen “as the classic experiment of the origin of life.(*)

A Wikipedia entry notes, “After Miller's death in 2007, scientists examining sealed vials preserved from the original experiments were able to show that there were actually well over 20 different amino acids produced in Miller's original experiments. That is considerably more than what Miller originally reported, and more than the 20 that naturally occur in life. Moreover, some evidence suggests that Earth's original atmosphere might have had a different composition from the gas used in the Miller–Urey experiment. There is abundant evidence of major volcanic eruptions 4 billion years ago, which would have released carbon dioxide (CO₂), nitrogen (N₂), hydrogen sulfide (H₂S), and sulfur dioxide (SO₂) into the atmosphere. Experiments using these gases in addition to the ones in the original Miller–Urey experiment have produced more diverse molecules.^[8]

There was another man of genius, Leslie Orgel, who also worked with Miller. There is hardly anything about him on his Wikipedia site, but somewhere I had squirreled notes on him back in the 1980s. Orgel was a Brit, breathtakingly brilliant, and he used ice as a research tool to discover more about the basic elements of air. Freezing things was a way of concentrating them. He froze ammonia, hydrogen cyanide, methane, and some other elements of the atmosphere. He produced amino acids, but he produced something else too something much more important. He produced one of the four constituents of the genetic alphabet, which directs all life. He had in fact discovered adenine, one of the four bases of  DNA. He ended by forming organic molecules, a big advance of our understanding.

I did find note of other achievements of his. “During the 1970s, Orgel suggested reconsidering the panspermia hypothesis, according to which the earliest forms of life on earth did not originate here, but arrived from outer space with meteorites.

His name is popularly known because of Orgel's rules, credited to him, particularly Orgel's Second Rule: "Evolution is cleverer than you are."

I am slowly realizing that the ability to analyze a batch of facts requires a certain kind of reasoning. It requires the talent of absorbing an abstraction.  To be astute means we have to be a good observer. J.S. Mill once said “The observer is not he who merely sees the thing which is before his eye, but he who sees that parts the thing is composed of.” Someone like me, sees a fact or make an observation, but I don’t realize its particularity. I get only a very general and inadequate view, a hazy gist of the thing. I don’t detect similarities to other observations. But the scientist breaks up the observation and notices the particular attributes of it. He suddenly sees what the rest of us don’t  – that the observation has properties which the original, basic observation didn’t have.

I really think that the dedication, the colossal capacity for focused effort, the self-effacing patience, the subordination of the appetite for glory in the service of solid achievement, the building of the powers of analysis in order to define a problem by breaking it down into its simplest elements, then testing a combination of them under different circumstances so something substantial can be proved -- that is and was – nothing short of a miracle to me.  And I cannot imagine that God could not help but feeling affection and admiration for the intelligence in the creatures He created.

In the end, science is a test of temperament and mind that underlies a culture. Creationism fails that test. 

(*) UPDATED KNOWLEDGE “Originally it was thought that the primitive secondary atmosphere contained mostly ammonia and methane. However, it is likely that most of the atmospheric carbon was CO₂ with perhaps some CO and the nitrogen mostly N₂. In practice gas mixtures containing CO, CO₂, N₂, etc. give much the same products as those containing CH₄ and NH₃ so long as there is no O₂. The hydrogen atoms come mostly from water vapor. In fact, in order to generate aromatic amino acids under primitive earth conditions it is necessary to use less hydrogen-rich gaseous mixtures. Most of the natural amino acids, hydroxyacids, purines, pyrimidines, and sugars have been made in variants of the Miller experiment.^{[citation needed]}

More recent results may question these conclusions. The University of Waterloo and University of Colorado conducted simulations in 2005 that indicated that the early atmosphere of Earth could have contained up to 40 percent hydrogen—implying a much more hospitable environment for the formation of prebiotic organic molecules. The escape of hydrogen from Earth's atmosphere into space may have occurred at only one percent of the rate previously believed based on revised estimates of the upper atmosphere's temperature.^[23] One of the authors, Owen Toon notes: "In this new scenario, organics can be produced efficiently in the early atmosphere, leading us back to the organic-rich soup-in-the-ocean concept... I think this study makes the experiments by Miller and others relevant again." Outgassing calculations using a chondritic model for the early earth complement the Waterloo/Colorado results in re-establishing the importance of the Miller–Urey experiment.^[24]”

 

Comments

[GulfCoastPirate]

I missed nothing. You are a creationist and just don't want to admit it.

[GulfCoastPirate]

Hilarious. Evolution has been around about 160 years and in that short period of time it hasn't found every fossil necessary to prove its main thesis to people like you to your satisfaction yet your good book has been around for thousands of years and still hasn't proven one single thing nor can any of you who take it literally prove anything in it. I'd say when evolution has been around for thousands of years it will have a much better track record of proof than anything in your good book.

Have you folks found that ark yet? Oh yea, it's in a Kentucky theme park. LOL.

[Tyler]

Conflating theory with fact: the GCP experience

[steve]

Hence, the limits of psychology.

As a kid I wanted to learn what made people tick, like most young folks I suppose.

So, I began studying psychology in college. I quickly found that there was a much broader scope and deeper understanding of the human condition to be found in literature rather than the social sciences. At least for me.

[Cieran]

Not very likely. The science of 1914 isn't laughed at today. Among other things, it powers your car and heats your home.

Real science is seldom laughed at, even in retrospect. For but one example, Newtonian mechanics has been supplanted by better idealizations, but for the vast majority of our interactions with the physical world, Newton's idealizations are perfectly accurate. And his work is a lot older than a mere century.

Science is a process and a product, and its product is a set of idealizations of how the natural world works. Those idealizations may get improved and revised over time, but that doesn't make the older versions laughable. It just makes the newer versions better, and often only slightly.

[Peter Brownlee]

You do not seem to understand scientific methodology and appear to be using non-scientific/religious terminology rather carelessly -- what are "tempore tantrums", please?

[Peter Brownlee]

As Carl Sagan said decades (!) ago, we are made of star stuff.

[GulfCoastPirate]

Supernovas are theory?

Whatever ...

[GulfCoastPirate]

Stephanie wrote:

'The Catholic Church recognizes Darwinian evolution within a theistic context.'

This is true. I went to a Catholic elementary (through 7th grade, in the 60's) and those of us in the class who transferred to public school at that point were significantly more advanced in math/science than our new public school counterpoints. About half of those who transferred (mostly for monetary reasons) and a number of those who went on to Catholic high school chose technical careers.

We studied religion in religion class and science in science class. There is nothing wrong with understanding both concepts as long as they are placed in the proper context. The problem today with the creationist types is instead of teaching their religious concepts in their homes or their own private schools they want to impose their religious concepts on public school science classes and other areas in the public sphere. They should learn to keep their religion to themselves in these areas.

[Tyler]

Still can't define speciation and wailing on a straw man. Keep it up GCP.

[Tyler]

No the fact that the elements of life came from supernovas.

[Tyler]

I would say that's an amazing case of the pkt calling the kettle black. Theres already been several good points on the failings of the theory of evolution, and they should be easy to answer if evolution is so bulletproof.

Instead youre acting like someone challenged your article of faith in the high cult of Dawkins.

[Tyler]

Nah. Just that there's serious questions about evolution that leave holes you could drive a truck through. Just admit you're a cultist about evolution broseph.

[Tyler]

A tempore tantrum is me hitting the wrong letter on my phone, you silly cint.

[Tyler]

By fighting the same battles you mean straw manning their opponents with CAVEMEN RIDING DINOSAURS.

Its like arguing with global warming cultists.

[Tyler]

Okay Stephanie, answer the questions Babak posed in your own words instead of doing the passive aggressive written equivalent of rolling your eyes and declaring, like a true leftist, the science is settled and can we stop talking about this please.

[Babak Makkinejad]

Gould, rather than admitting that Darwinian mechanisms cannot give rise to either life or new species, coined a new phrase "Punctuated Equilibrium" to obfuscate the profound ignorance of scientific community in regards to the origin of species and origin of life.

Punctuated equilibrium, did not supply a plausible research program nor a plausible framework within which one could carry out research which would explain such things as the evolution of man or the co-evolution of plants and flying insects.

Or take cilia; only a dogmatic person would insist that such a structure could be the result of random mutations and changes.

You state they are tired of arguing the same point over and over again; that might be true but that also is part of their duty to expound on areas where human knowledge is adequate and also admit as to where it is not.

Many physicists write popularized science books on Quantum Theory, Cosmology etc. for the scientifically illiterate - rehashing the same material over and over again. But they make money and lay claim to some limited fame and never complain about having gone over the same trite material.

The creationist, like their Wahabi counterparts, no doubt wish to remain ignorant. That is a problem of protestantism but the evolutionary biologists must also refrain from feeding the rest of us fables and admit ignorance when it is warranted.

I think that Gould and his ilk were indeed carrying out an anti-religious agenda which they are loath to admit.

[Babak Makkinejad]

Thank you for your detailed and meaty rebuttal of my assertions.

[Alba Etie]

Tyler
Off topic completely - but what do you reckon will be the final deposition of the Bliven Family grazing stand off with the BLM ? And it looked liked armed militia where pointing sniper rifles from the bridge at the Federal officers down in the draw , what are we to make of that apparent threat of deadly force against Federal Officers ? . Is the Sage Brush Rebellion about to reignite out West ? Did it ever really go away ?

[William R. Cumming]

Stephanie! Even Professor Gould missed it. He had concluded
that human evolution ended about 50K years ago and now only about cultural evolution.

One example: Lactose intolerance. The norm! But abot 6000 years ago two cattle cultures arose. The Danes [Celts?] and the Masai in Africa, where in both cultures genetic evolution allowed adults to become lactose tolerant.

[Fred]

GCP,

Where did those supernova's come from? Just keep repeating. "And where did that come from?"

[Nightsticker]

GCP,

And the supernovas came from????????

Not necessary for you to respond; I am certain
you can work out how a continued discussion
would go.

Nightsticker
USMC 1965-1972
FBI 1972-1996

[Tyler]

I have it on reliable source from someone high in BLM's law enforcement arm that it was the closest they came to dying (their personal opinion ). BLMs uniformed branch of rangers number something like 400, and Special Agents half that I believe. Something like 2000 plus people against that. There were snipers on both sides and it would have been a blood bath if someone had pulled a trigger.

Personally what do they expect when Obama makes law via executive fiat, a dead Border Patrol Agent lies unjustified, illegal alien criminals are beatified, BUT HEY WE GOT TO MAKE SURE THE ENDANGERED SPECIES ACT IS FOLLOWED NATION OF LAWS MAN!

In other words when you decide to only follow the laws you want don't be surprised when other people get the same idea.

There is a very strong sentiment that I pick up around here that favors 'my neighbor' over 'my nation'. I imagine this will give heart to other people looking to defy the FedGov.

[Tyler]

Gould's mismeasure of man is PC good think dogma and his assertion that "human evolution ended" is pretty obviously him rolling on his side and pissing himself while exposing his belly to his academia master begging 'pwease don't hurt me".

[Fred]

"They should learn to keep their religion to themselves..."
Yes, please get those elected officials of ours to outlaw actually putting religious beliefs into action. Who do these people think they are, Americans or something. What other rights will you take away next?