Evolution Is Both Vertical and Horizontal
Christians who do not want to admit we came to being through evolution are creative in their hopeless defense of creationism. Several comments on this blog have argued that there has not been enough time since God created the universe until now for humans to have come up through evolution. This makes a huge assumption about the relationship between evolution and time.
Others argue the some of our physical qualities, such as the hand, are so complex they required a "designer". There are so many phony arguments, "intelligent design", etc.
Now opponents of evolution have a new problem to deal with. It is horizontal evolution. These are changes in DNA that travel from one species to another altering the receiving one. It happens when infections are carried from their original host to a new one.
One of the long standing interests of science has been the creatures in our guts. I hope I am correct in calling them bacteria. It is apparent they have experienced evolution parallel to that of the creatures like us who host them. These creatures have played a role in the evolution of their hosts.
It is my understanding every religion in the world has a creation story. Telling the story of man is telling the story of a god. One can see in Christianity the necessity of making up a creations story to justify the rest of the tale.
My guess is that science will continue to discover not only the origins of humans but of the entire universe. Religion has its work cut out. It must come up with phony reasons why its fair tale is true and science based explanations are not.
Test
ReplyDeletewhen you say that science will continue to discover....the origins of humans but the entire universe do you mean they will "discover" the how and not the why? or do you mean that they will discover both the how and the why. in any event, I think that you are way out of step with the physics of the 21st century. have been reading articles lately that physics has come to kind of dead end: too much stuff out there that we just can't explain (e.g. dark matter). maybe they are giving up too soon. or maybe not. anyhow, I fear that you are still back there in 1925 with Clarence and William and the fundamentalists.
ReplyDeleteDid you read the link?
Deleteyes, I skimmed your link. no surprise: anyone who has thought seriously about evolutionary biology must have suspected that there is more to the story than classic Darwinism would suggest. whether this is the answer or not remains to be seen. that aside, my comments related to physics, not biology. to the puzzles that at least some physicists say are leaving us baffled, or God forbid, taking us back to metaphysics. thus the charge that some physicists are doing "theology" not science. with that, I would quickly concede that I have presented a rather crude account of a profoundly complex issue. so be it. but one thing that I cannot avoid is the way in which you express your views: you are most certainly back in Tennessee with Darrow and Brian.
DeleteYou sound exactly like Wanna when he first read something about quantum physics. He immediately thought, as I recall, it might have something to do with religion. I know some PhD's in physics and they are all atheists and don't find any religion in quantum physics.
Deleteas usual you mange to put an anti-religion spin on my remarks. I was merely trying to point out that there are those in the physics community who are wondering about the limits of physics. and that there are those, probably some of your atheist friends, who think that some physicists are doing "theology" not science. you seem to be incapable of treating any remark as a mere observation, always bringing the conversation back to your subjectivist hatred of religion. in any case, you must admit that subatomic physics has gotten very problematic: matter-antimatter, Higgs bosons, muons, matter as "solidified" energy, worm holes in space, particles that are affected by the process of observation (in other words difficulties with the very notion of the "objective" observer). 'nuf said.
DeleteThere are plenty of people, not physicists, who think meta physics is about religion. For you to conclude that because physics finds new not explainable things means means there is not progress toward understanding where the universe came from is B.S. We do not know at this time where the universe came from. I just expressed my opinion that I think we will someday know.
Deletemaybe you are right.maybe you are wrong. I merely pointed out that some very smart people think that maybe we have reached a point at which our ability to know just ran out of gas. as to metaphysics and religion: you are back to your religion hang up. I suppose, however, that you are right insofar as metaphysics (as in Aristotle) leads to questions about a Prime Mover.
DeleteIf you are talking about transcendental concepts you are speaking metaphysically. I don't know any "objective observers". There is some very exciting science going on all the time. I suggest phys.org for a daily compilation of new discoveries.
DeleteAbsolutely fascinating! I have often wondered about a form of "horizontal transfer" but had no idea of how such a thing could happen. I love molecular genetics and it has advanced so much in the decades since I first learned about it. It would advance many times over long after I am dead. I see nothing that will support any creation sort of model for our universe.
ReplyDelete