As you might know, proponents of so-called “Intelligent Design” are pushing — in the US and a handful of theocratic states, in Europe we are luckily spared this nonsense — for the introduction of the teaching of a purported controversy between the Theory of Evolution through natural selection and their own re-branded version of creationism.
They want us to believe that the scientific world is split between those who believe in Darwin’s theory and those who oppose it and invoke the intervention of an intelligent “designer”, which they studiously avoid naming by the name of “God” lest they be accused of pushing a religious agenda.
If that was the case, one would expect that if we asked a group of scientists which are the most puzzling questions that science faces today, one of them would be “Did life evolve or was it designed?”
Instead, this all-important question seems to have been omitted by those “evilutionists” that run Science Magazine when they published their list of the 125 hardest questions for science.
The only question that comes near is “How and Where Did Life on Earth Arise?”, but it regards abiogenesis rather than evolution and there’s no mention of the possibility of a “designer” in there.
So much for the idea of a controversy.
‘…an intelligent “designer”, which they studiously avoid naming by the name of “God” lest they be accused of pushing a religious agenda.’
It’s amazing how much so-called science criticizes ID not on the basis of the validity of its arguments, but on the basis of the putative motivations of its proponents.
‘If that was the case, one would expect that if we asked a group of scientists which are the most puzzling questions that science faces today, one of them would be “Did life evolve or was it designed?”’
It depends what group you asked. If your starting point was the staff of Science magazine, as it was in this case, you might expect them to be highly biased against a challenge to the scientific establishment, even to the point of not wanting to dignify the opposition by admitting it exists.
‘Instead, this all-important question seems to have been omitted by those “evilutionists” that run Science Magazine when they published their list of the 125 hardest questions for science.’
At this link, I only see the top 25 questions. Can we see the whole list on the web?
‘The only question that comes near is “How and Where Did Life on Earth Arise?”, but it regards abiogenesis rather than evolution’
Technically true, but you’ve got to admit the questions are closely related. In fact, Science magazine categorizes the article you mentioned under the “Evolution” Subject Collection.
If life did not first arise by natural processes (and Zimmer’s article admits there are no leading explanations for how it could have), then you’ve already admitted the existence of a non-natural Creator. If, then, we assume a Creator for origin of life, Occam’s Razor would suggest the Creator as the simplest explanation for origin of species.
Since no satisfactory explanation of a natural origin of life has been found, it would be premature to conclude that the natural origin of life is a “fact” and not controversial.
Besides the origin of life question, other questions on the top-25 list clearly impinge on evolution. For example, “How Did Cooperative Behavior Evolve?” and “What Is the Biological Basis of Consciousness?” Evolutionary theory cannot begin to offer a naturalistic explanation of the origin of consciousness without finding a biological basis for it.
Lack of an explanation for how evolution occurred naturally does not in itself disprove the theory of naturalistic evolution, but it certainly provides justification for questioning the theory.
Lars
Fellow Cocoon user
P.S.
According to the Discovery Institute, over 300 scientists have signed this statement of “scientific dissent from Darwinism.” You can read the credentials of the 100 who had signed by the time the statement first went public. The statement reads, “We are skeptical of claims for the ability of random mutation and natural selection to account for the complexity of life. Careful examination of the evidence for Darwinian theory should be encouraged.”
Clearly there is more than a little controversy.