SUMMARY OF PART 3 – SHE’S SINKING
But few people know this, or that there’s a better theory
Brief summaries of chapters 9 and 10—unpacked in detail in Evolution’s Iceberg—are given below. Full referencing of quotes and sources can be found in the book.
9 – Why is RMS Evolution still afloat?
- While most ideas, authorities and institutions are questioned, critiqued and often distrusted within Western culture today, Evolution—if thought about at all—is widely assumed to be “unsinkable.” The academic establishment, with the willing collusion of the media, constantly reinforces this view.
- We believe it because others we trust tell us it’s true. This is known as groupthink. Even amongst scientists, their evolutionary creed is sustained by their community of like-minded believers.
- The result is that most people don’t even know there is a debate about the evidence.
- There’s a general blindness to counter-evidence and any that is noticed is assumed to have been explained by someone, somewhere.
- Even most scientists’ knowledge of Evolution is second hand. They haven’t thought about it, far less checked out the evidence for themselves.
- Why so intolerant? Evolution is defended with such religious fervour and dogmatism because evolutionary theory underpins the atheistic worldview of scientific materialism. Materialism offers explanations of who we are, why we are here, and what is our destiny. This effectively makes it a religion in competition with other religions and ideologies. These “have become the new dogmatists”.
- It’s a religion that is being taught via the theory of Evolution in schools and universities in the name of science.
- When scientists and others do survey ‘below decks’ they are often surprised just how weak the evidence in favour of the theory is, and how strong the counter-evidence.
- Dissent is not tolerated. Those who dare to voice their criticisms, whether academics, teachers or scientists generally, risk losing their current job, the prospect of future work, and ostracism from the scientific community.
- Günter Bechly is an example of a scientist, in this case a palaeontologist, who checked out the evidence and lost his job as a result of expressing his new-found views.
10 – A better theory: Intelligent Design
- A growing number of mainstream biologists have concluded that neo-Darwinism can’t explain the origin of novel biology—the very thing it is supposed to explain.
- These ‘insider’ critics of neo-Darwinism have proposed the addition of a number of theories with the intention of rescuing unguided, naturalistic evolutionary theory. This so-called Extended Evolutionary Synthesis (EES) includes ideas such as self-organization and symbiogenesis.
- However, the various theories within the EES still assume the prior existence of, and are unable to explain the origin of, complex specified information, which is so evident in molecular biology. Such unguided processes cannot explain the evidence.
- Intelligent Design (ID)—design derived from a mind—is the best explanation for the origin of the information that is essential to the existence of life in all its variety of body plans. Only ID has the necessary explanatory power.
- ID is variously attacked as unscientific and/or anti-scientific, operating under the subterfuge that “critics of evolution must be motivated by religion, whereas defenders of evolution are supposedly the disinterested pursuers of truth”.
- However, ID is science because (1) it uses the scientific method known as abduction: inference to the best explanation; (2) it makes testable predictions; and (3) it has published peer-reviewed papers in prestigious scientific journals.
- RMS Evolution will sink—with mathematical certainty. Why so? Because of the evidence: it’s the mathematics of molecular biology that sinks RMS Evolution.
Credits and Permissions
Günter Bechly modified image, courtesy of Dr. Günter Bechly [CC BY-SA 4.0], via Wikimedia Commons.