Search

ARCHIVES
CONTACT US
WORLD NEWS

Evolution is good science

To the editor,

One can contend that science is a religion, considering the fact that it seeks to explain the world around us, but keep in mind that the connotation the word "religion" has earned in society definitely clashes with the basis of scientific principles. If we wish to argue logistics, then by all means science is a religion, but remember. . .words are our servants, not our masters.

Last Thursday, Ms. Bapat wrote a lovely article on the validity of Evolutionary Theory being taught in schools. It was well researched, well written, and well rounded in its approach to a very sensitive topic. She is completely right, evolution needs to be taught in schools. Think of the antibiotic resistance crisis that we humans now face, if more doctors were aware of the principles of evolution, perhaps it would not be such an issue. It is important for understanding the world around us.

Mr. Froude, in response to this article, seems to contend that the Theory of Evolution is not science simply because it is not an "indisputable and proven fact." The well known Theory of Relativity also bears the brand of the word "theory" on its well respected name, and certainly he would not venture to restrict its status as a science. Let me remind him that all laws of science start as simple unproved theories and evolve into laws over trial and time. Now is simply that period of time during which evolution is undergoing its trials on the path to proof or disproof. It is interesting that Mr. Froude is so impatient with the proof of evolution which has been around a meager 150 years, when all of the creationism theories combined have yet to provide as much solid evidence as it has, despite their being around hundreds of times longer.

Mr. Froude is also suffering from an age old and outdated case of human self-centeredness. We are animals. We are governed by the same rules, we are made of the same materials, and we are not superior. This is a hard reality to face, but it is a beautiful one too. If we accept our carnal origins and cease to tribute a "creator" with our origination, our accomplishments suddenly become worth a lot more. Most of us are familiar with William Paley's witty creationism argument of the watchmaker. It goes something like this: upon finding a simple stone while walking through a field you would not think much of it, but if you were to happen upon a watch in that same field, the complexity of that watch would leave you no choice but to believe that there had to have been a "watchmaker". .i.e.. . .God at some time in that watch's existence. But what if there hadn't been a watchmaker? Wouldn't you be more impressed if the watch had made itself?

I find that humans are far more stunning and miraculous creatures if we, all on our own, have created art, music, love, and everything else that is simply amazing about our species. It does not devalue morals, nor does it turn the world black and white to omit the watchmaker from our creation story, it simply is all the more impressive.

Rhiannon Crain

Ecology and evolutionary biology sophomore