All the people Bob quoted below are atheists (I do not know about the
textbook authors Purees et al). Obviously their theology is getting in
the way of their science -- in the same way that many YECs and others
sometimes do. Science is an objective method to investigate the way
things are. Making conclusions based on scientific findings is the job
of each individual. One individual should not tell another individual
what to believe - whether that is a scientist, pastor, teacher, or
parent. We can only lay the facts out before others, give them our own
conclusions and allow them to make their own decisions based on facts,
not interpretations.
Unfortunately the world usually doesn't "behave" in this manner, but
everyone in a teaching position thinks their own opinions or
understandings are the right ones. I don't think Jesus referred to
people as sheep for no reason. People are primarily followers, and we
follow many strangers voices.
My point is that just because these "prominent scientists" are making
their conclusions of the science of evolution does not mean evolution
"if true" proves that God doesn't exist or that life is undirected etc
etc. I see the exact same evidence, and believe quite the opposite but
don't have to discard real science (which currently points to the
validity of evolutionary theory quite strongly) to believe in Jesus
Christ and the integrity of the entire Bible.
What does teleology mean? You might see that I prefer to use simple
language (I'm a writer, I have to!) - when we write to the 'lowest
common denominator' we can all understand! :)
In Christ,
Wendee
>There are prominent evolutionists who say that evolution is
undirected. Here
>are some:
>
>Perhaps the most prominent synthetic evolutionary theorist was George
Gaylord
>Simpson, who as you know, was a mid-century world class
paleontologist. He
>wrote, "Man is the result of a purposeless and materialistic process
that
>did not have him in mind...He happens to repre sent the high est form
of
>organization of matter and energy that has ever ap peared” " (The
Meaning of
>Evolution. 1950, p. 344). In a later edition he changed
"materialistic" to
>"naturalistic".
>
>In another place he wrote, “Evolution has no purpose; man must supply
this
>for himself” (p. 310).
>
> Francisco Ayala, past president of American Association for the
Advancement
>of Science asserted that Darwin’s “mechanism, natural se lection,
excluded
>God as the explanation accounting for the obvious design of
or ganisms”
>(Darwin’s revolution. In Campbell, J. H. and Schopf, J. W., Eds.
Creative
>Evolution. 1995, p. 5).
>
>Dawkins (1987) expanded and popularized the idea of purposelessness:
"Natural
>selection, the blind, unconscious, automatic process which Darwin
>dis cov ered, and which we now know is the explanation for the
existence and
>ap parently purposeful form of all life, has no purpose in
mind.…Natural
>selection is the blind watchmaker, blind because it does not see
ahead, does
>not plan conse quences, has no purpose in view” (The Blind
Watchmaker" pp. 5,
>21).
>
>That Darwinism is goal-less is asserted in a modern college biology
text book
>by Purves, et al.. These authors state: "Accepting this paradigm
(Darwinism,
>DH) means accepting not only the processes of evolution, but also the
view
>that the living world is constantly evolving, but with out any
'goals.' The
>idea that evolutionary change is not directed toward a final goal or
state
>has been more difficult for some people to accept than the process of
>evolution itself" (Life: The Science of Biology, 4th ed. 1995, p.
14..).
>
>Simpson’s assertion that evolution has no purpose; “man must supply
that for
>himself,” is the essen tial message of evolution for education,
according to
>Futuyama (Science on Trial: The Case of Evolution, 1983, p. 13).
“Some
>shrink from the conclusion that the human species was not designed,
has no
>purpose, and is the product of mere mechanical mechanisms”
Evolutionary
>Biology. 2nd Ed. 1986, p. 3). In an open letter.
>
>The National Association of Biology Teachers an organization of
science
>teachers, endorses, among other statements, this one on evolution:
"The
>diversity of life on earth is the outcome of evolution: an
unpredictable and
>natural process of temporal descent with genetic modification that is
>affected by natural selection, chance, historical contingencies and
changing
>environments."
>
>In an open letter to Richard Storey, to the President of the NABT,
Massimo
>Pigliucci defined evolution this way "The diversity of life on earth
is the
>outcome of evolution,: a natural process of temporal descent with
genetic
>modification that is _non-directional_, except for human
intervention, and is
>explicable by principles of physical and biological science, and
historical
>contingencies (emphasis mine.) (March 22, 1998)
>
>He explained the word "non-directional" "First it implies that
evolution is
>not going anywhere in particular, on which most evolutionists would
>agree....Second, and most importantly, it takes care of old (wrong)
theories
>of "internal" forces directing evolution toward increasing complexity
or of
>the whole idea of a "ladder of being". In other words, don't look at
>evolution as a process aimed at producing humans, because there is no
>evidence that it is."
>
>As recently as September 1999 Ernst Mayr "one of the towering figures
in the
>history of evolutionary biology" gave a lecture in Stockholm on
receiving the
>Crafoord Prize from the Royal Swedish Academy of Science. It was
published in
>the July 2000 issue of _Scientific American_. One of his main points
was
>that "Darwin's theory of natural selection made _any_ invocation of
teleology
>unnecessary" (p. 82. Emphasis added).
>
>In my opinion purposelessness is deeply embedded in evolutionary
theory. I
>doubt if you would find any mainline evolutionists who would deny
this.
>
>Best regards,
>
>Bob
>
>
>
>
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
~~ Wendee Holtcamp -- wendee@greendzn.com ~~
~~ Environment/Travel/Science Writer ~~ www.greendzn.com ~~
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
How many seas must a white dove sail before
she can sleep in the sand? -- Bob Dylan
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sun Jul 02 2000 - 18:56:45 EDT