As a blogger I hereby exercise my right to use this space to rant. You've been warned.

Whenever the topic of evolution versus Creationism (or whatever you want to label it) comes up, I try to hold my tongue. I'm not one who vehemently declares their position on every single issue. In fact, for many things I tend to take the middle ground, seeing merit in the arguments of both sides. But when it comes to evolution, I'm decidedly one-sided.

My need to vent came up today after reading a news article on Yahoo. The gist is this (taken directly from the story): A State Board of Education subcommittee began four days of trial-like hearings on evolution, and witnesses were advocates of intelligent design, critics of evolution or both. The entire board plans to consider changes in June to standards that determine how Kansas students are tested on science.

I cannot believe that in this day an age there is even a debate about whether or not to teach evolution in schools. In my mind it is tantamount to having a discussion over whether or not kids should be taught about the so-called "Law of Gravity" because it's just possible that objects fall down on account of the fact that everything in this world is inhabited by tiny drunk people. Every time this comes up, I get more and more angry and frustrated with it. What's worse is that this movement is actually being taken seriously. I'm tired of conservative religious types forcing their (in my opinion) misguided beliefs on the rest of us, and I'm particularly tired of people talking about and railing against things they don't even understand.

For starters, there is only one thing that should be taught in science class: science. This intelligent design crap has no place in any science curriculum anywhere. I don't recall attending math class and having the teacher demonstrate an alternative to "The Pythagorean Theorem" called "Right Triangles Have Spooky Magic Powers" just because somebody out there doesn't understand it and feels threatened by the knowledge that hey, what do you know, a² plus b² really does equal c². I have nothing against teaching theories of creation, but it shouldn't be done in science class, particularly since doing so lends them an undue credibility and authority. Besides, if they want to inject Creationism into biology class, then I think kids should learn about every single world religion in theology classes instead of just Christianity. The week on Atheism is essentially a study hall.

One of the main arguments against teaching evolution (or solely evolution) is that it isn't a proven fact. I personally would tend to disagree with that assessment, but even so, I have a deeper dislike for the statement because to me it reeks of naivety. Here's the deal with evolution, folks, and one of the reasons I get so annoyed with people who say we shouldn't teach it or that it isn't proven: evolution is based on our observations of the world. It's that simple. It's not like Darwin and his supporters just decided to come up with it on the spot 'cause they were bored:

Evolutionist: Hey, Darwin, whatcha doin' tonight?
Darwin: Oh, I dunno, I was thinking about getting really ripped and making up some theories to fuck with the God freaks.
Evolutionist: Cool! Count me in! What theory should we come up with?
Darwin: Something that will really stir up trouble, like proving there is no such thing as a soul or, hey, how about an explanation of how all the species came to be!
Evolutionist: Awesome! They're gonna freak out!
Darwin: Yea, I can see it now: gradual change, potentially through both selective pressures and random mutations, results in the diversification of the species.
Evolutionist: Brilliant! What are you gonna call it?
Darwin: Hmmm, how about animal transformification.
Evolutionist: Not bad--
Darwin: --No, wait! Evolution. That's way better!

The Theory of Evolution is a staple of modern scientific thought not simply because some naturalist saw a few finches and thought it would be a lark to write about them. It exists because it is an eminently observable phenomenon. And saying that almost confuses the matter because I want to get across the point that someone didn't just come up with the theory and now we can see things that validate it. No, evolution, as with many other theories and laws, is at its heart a description of what scientists have come to learn about how our world works (in this case, how species arise and change) in large part through observation. So I have hard time agreeing with anyone who says it is unproven because to me that is like telling me that I can't prove it when I say "The Sun is yellow". Maybe not, but I can probably prove that you are an idiot.

The WikiPedia entry about evolution makes the point very well: The modern synthesis, like its Mendelian and Darwinian antecedents, is a scientific theory. In plain English, people use the word "theory" to signify "conjecture", "speculation", or "opinion". In contrast, a scientific theory is a model of the world (or some portion of it) from which falsifiable hypotheses can be generated and be verified through empirical observation. In this sense, "theory" and "fact" do not stand in opposition, but rather exist in a reciprocal relationship. Currently, the modern synthesis is the most powerful theory explaining variation and speciation, and within the science of biology, it has completely replaced other explanations for the origin of species, including creationism and Lamarckism.

Not that I need to go into details on how one can show support for the existence of evolution, but it certainly isn't a nebulous phenomenon that can only be understood by eggheads with bunsens and beakers. Even Bunsen and Beaker are probably savvy enough to point out a few examples. How about selective breeding in animals (specifically dogs or horses)? What about bacteria that have become resistant to antibiotics? In my mind, it isn't that hard to see, especially when one can find examples in abundance from the microscopic to the macroscopic world. Throw in the fossil record and you have compelling evidence.

Dig deeper and it gets more compelling. What about satellite DNA, the junk strands of code that exist in our genetic makeup but don't seem to have any function? If not leftovers from evolutionary processes involving gradual (and sometimes punctuated) changes then why would we have it? Is God a half-assed creator? How about the fact that the mitochondria in our cells, the powerhouses that create energy, have different DNA from our own? This is explained by the Endosymbiotic theory which postulates that the organelles of a cell were originally unicellular organisms without a nucleus (prokaryotes) that came to live within larger cellular organisms (eukaryotes) developing a symbiotic relationship. Evolution in action, baby.

I also find the idea of spouting evolution as "unproven" to be amusing in comparison to the alternatives. Can you prove Creationism? Can you prove the existence of God or a Divine Creator? The arguments seem to center around statements like, "Well, somebody had to do it all, right?" or "I think flowers are pretty and things being pretty are a human concept so that must mean someone created flowers to be pretty!" And God help you if you say, "Evolution can't be true because the Bible says the world was created in seven days." I'm only going to say this once, people: IT WAS WRITTEN BY HUMAN BEINGS. Try selling that "can't be true cause it contradicts the Bible" logic to the Hindus and see how it flies.

Another oft-touted reason given in support of the need for an alternative to teaching evolution is that the world is too complicated to not have had some intelligent maker behind it all. What a load of ignorant, self-important, bullshit. Just because something is complicated or beyond comprehension doesn't mean that it requires sentience. I've studied enough math and science (and rolled enough dice) to know that randomness and complexity often go hand and hand. A mathematical formula can create a beautiful shape or a complex form, but there's no mind behind it, just numbers (for an example, check out the relationship between the Golden Ratio and a nautilus shell). I cannot possibly comprehend the complexities of a weather system or the currents of the oceans, but that doesn't mean it's logical to assume that some all powerful being is sitting on a cloud blowing as hard as he can to create the jet stream while stirring the Pacific with his sandled toes. Stop letting the limitations of your own intellect dictate the reasoning behind how the world works.

I often fail to understand of what all these people are so afraid. Why does evolution scare them so much? Do they have such a large ego that they can't admit that we might be genetically related to the rest of the species on this planet? And, for everyone's sake, get it right: We aren't descended from monkeys. We, as primates (humans, gorillas, chimps, monkeys, etc.), share a common ancestor. Yea, I know, subtle points are lost on many people, but I'm tired of the ignorance that spews unfettered from some mouths. Personally, I think the idea that I might somehow be connected to all other life is comforting. It gives a sense of fitting in to the grand scheme of existence.

I imagine many dislike evolution because it, in their minds, seems to displace their deity of choice (whether it be the Jewish, Christian, or Muslim God, or that pancake on the ceiling that you venerate even though it is sacrilicious). Although my own personal thoughts on The Almighty are uncertain, I've never felt that evolution or science in general was contrary to faith. In my mind, the gradual evolution of species and the formation of our solar system and planet Earth over millions of years makes way more sense than it all coming into existence in a matter of days. Furthermore, I want to think that my god would think things through before creating an entire Universe (or All Of Existence) and not do so because he needed something to amuse himself while on the celestial can. Having said that, I would think that if a supreme being did indeed create existence, they would have seen to every last detail. They would have put into motion an entire system: rules and laws by which everything would run and fundamental components out of which everything would be made. To me, that's how a Divine Creator operates. And without trying to sound too philosophical, if a grand intelligence is ultimately behind all of existence, then to know God is, in part, to know the fruits of God's work and the rules by which all of God's creation is governed.

Study evolution a little closer before you try to summarily dismiss it from our children's education. You never know, you might even find God.

Tags: Evolution, Intelligent Design