The Science of Evolution

People are not up front about their biases. The arguments one makes are best understood when biases are taken into consideration. If a person does not admit some form of bias I barely blink an eye at their opinion knowing that the entire frame of the argument may have false motives. It only makes sense then for writers to admit their bias at the outset--I am a Christian in the Presbyterian denomination.

Evolution is, according to Merriam-Webster, a theory that the various types of animals and plants have their origin in other preexisting types and that the distinguishable differences are due to modifications in successive generations.

As a definition, if this is the one scientists agree on, it seems legitimate but its application has been cemented into the mainstream as an appeal to common practice. It is taught as self-evident in the public schools and the universities. Religious explanations have no merit and no room in the popular scientific community.

But is science honest with their bias and with what they don't know? It turns out that on a grand scale they are finally beginning to admit just how much they do not know about evolution. The recent edition of Science Magazine http://www.sciencemag.org/ outlines 125 questions science cannot answer. Some of these questions are simple things like "Will we ever come up with another fuel source other than oil that meets the needs of humanity on a vast scale?" But what about the ones that directly relate to evolution?

Christians will answer every question saying, "God did it." This is of course an appeal to a higher authority and puts a burden of proof on science. Some scientists and people in the general population who do not believe in God often put the burden of proof on Christians to prove God created. All of these arguments are an appeal to a consequence of belief and, I hope is apparent when one sees the list of things science cannot answer, ultimately an appeal to faith. Finally, non-atheistic scientists do not necessarily discount the possible existence of a god. The following questions come from the recent Science Magazine and I have sprinkled in some biased commentary and questions, logical or not.

1. What drove cosmic inflation? In other words when the universe expanded in the Big Bang theory what drove the "charge"?
2. What is the biological basis of consciousness?
3. Why do humans have so few genes and why have humans not evolved in any increase in genes? No human remains ever discovered have anything but 100% of the same genes we have today.
4. How do/did the planets form? Planets, according to school textbooks, were formed from giant balls of dust, gas and ice. Why did the sun not devour all these particles..in particular those of Mercury? The fact that Mercury even exists seems to be unexplainable.
5. How do organs and whole organisms know when to stop growing? How do genes set limits on the rat heart so that it grows into the right sized ribcage?
6. What genetic changes made us distinctly human?
7. Why doesn't a prenant woman reject her fetus? A mother's immune system does not "realize" that the fetus is a foreign object though it gets 1/2 its genes from the father? This very concept was first introduced in 1952 by Peter Medawar and it still baffles scientists.
8. How did cooperative behavior evolve?
9. Why do we dream?
10. Why do people have a sense of morality?
11. What is the biological root of sexual orientation? (pg. 95) So here we see science confirming that they have no proof that people are "born" gay.
12. What is species? (p. 96) The definition of species must be very important if one considers that the concept of species is intricately woven in evolutionary theory.
13. How did flowers evolve? Evolution as a real working theory would need to explain this wouldn't it? Why would one form of life evolve and another simply "appear"?
14. Why were some dinosours so large? With this I add, how could they eat enough to maintain their size? Why did they not deplete the resources of the planet? What would happen if an iguana didn't stop growing? What might it look like? I would like science to build models of current reptiles with long term growth because after all, reptiles do not stop growing and dinosours were reptiles.

These are but a few of the questions science cannot answer. These questions run the gamut of all the sciences. Taken in part they do not seem like much but taken in whole suggests that we don't know as much as we think we know and yet many a scientist...and particularly an atheist evolutionist...hold great faith in it. What is the old saying, "sometimes the simplest explanation is the right one?"