Darwinism is true, because it’s true
Trevor H., our doughty defender of Darwin, has more comments in the thread, “Zmirak dismantles the Derb, revisited,” and I reply. As I see it, Trevor’s pro-Darwin reasoning goes essentially backward. Instead of answering the objection that various biological facts are incompatible with or cannot be explained by Darwinian evolution, he keeps saying that if any biological fact exists, that only proves that Darwinian evolution must have created it. So the discussion has gotten rather repetitive. Still, while no new ground is broken in the exchange (on either side), I think Trevor’s comments are worth reading, as illustrative of the thinking of most Darwinists.
Carol Iannone writes:
And now the social scientists have got into the act. Since we have altruism, unselfishness, cooperation and such things in our makeup, these traits must have evolved! When? Oh, maybe ten thousand years ago, or maybe even just 500 to 1000 years ago. This link is to a video of the whole discussion at the Templeton Foundation chaired by David Brooks, but there is also a transcript available. LA replies:
And according to evolutionist Jerry Coyne in his book, Why Evolution is True, various human mental and cultural qualities could not have evolved by Darwinian processes, because they have appeared in just a few thousand years.Ben W. writes:
1. Darwinism is true because more scientists believe it is. Posted by Lawrence Auster at May 02, 2009 10:16 AM | Send Email entry |