Dr. Bill Harris, the solitary proponent to testify on behalf of Senate Bill 1270, claimed that Charles Darwin’s theory of evolution suffered a weakness because the author had no way of explaining how natural selection worked. He is correct. Darwin could observe selection but he could not explain its workings because the science of genomics didn’t exist in his day. It does now.

Perhaps Dr. Harris may have felt justified in proposing Intelligent Design as valid content for K-12 science classes because of his faith. Genesis 2:19 reads, “And out of the ground the LORD God formed every beast of the field, and every fowl of the air; and brought [them] unto Adam to see what he would call them: and whatsoever Adam called every living creature, that [was] the name thereof.” (King James Version)

I personally draw some comfort from Intelligent Design because I cannot imagine what caused the universe to arise, but this belief is not scientific and therefore does not belong in science curricula. It is not science.

In defense of Darwin’s “On the Origin of Species,” I suggest viewing Nova: What Darwin Never Knew (https://youtu.be/ov00SrBwjKQ) for a crash course in genomics. You will see that modern science knows the function of the genome in building lifeforms and the role mutations play in natural selection. Furthermore, this knowledge is proving extremely useful in medical research.

It really doesn’t matter that Darwin didn’t fully understand the mechanics of evolution. He could observe it in nature and now science has discovered the methodology.

Let’s leave science curriculum to the scientists and science teachers.

 

(13) comments

Justthinking

By the Bible, we are all related by insest. If there’s only Adam and Eve, then we are all have the same genes. Then why are they the most prejudiced?

Justthinking

There’s around 4000 different faiths in the world, 3,999 people claim the others are fake. Then there’s other people say all 4000 are fakes. Religion belongs in the home, religious schools and places of faith, but Not in public schools.

DieselDan

I certainly have my own thoughts on Darwin, Intelligent Design, and the theory of evolution and what should be included in schools. Science is nothing more than the exploration and revelation of information about how things work in the world. The scientific method is the method used to explore new information. One of the facits of the scientific method is reproducing results. To make this as simple as possible, evolution has never been observed. Therefore it is religion. No sea cucumber has ever become a fish; no fish has ever become a komodo dragon; no alligator has ever become an elephant; and dumbo did not become a bird. The fact that we see ducks of many types and geese of many types and thousands of bird species does not confirm evolution only the natural genetic variation available in the organisms type being expressed over time. To believe that which has never been observed is misguided. In fact it is a religion of its own to believe that something came from nothing without a creator/designer. 0+0=0. Feel free to believe the evolution story that Haeckel foisted on the world that ontogeny recapitulates ontogeny by faking a chart of different fetuses in an attempt to show that all organisms have the same origin. They do not. This was debunked more than 100 years ago but it's still taught in college taxonomy courses. My recommendation would be to discuss the unanswered questions of evolution if you are going to be honest to the students. Science is science but evolution is religion. I hold to a biblical world view, my faith is defined this way:Hebrews 11:1 Now faith is being sire of what we hope for and certain of what we do not see. NIV84

DieselDan

In case you were wondering I have a BS degree in general biology, a BS degree from sdsu in fish and wildlife science and a MS degree in wildlife specializing in population dynamics and statistics. I was the harvest survey coordinator for sdgfp and their asst federal aid coordinator for 18 years and then served as the Environmental Compliance Coordinator for Bureau of Reclamation's Dakotas Area Office (Bismarck) for 13 years so I have a little science background.

Iman

I dissected a frog once.

Justthinking

Pity you didn’t learn anything.

DieselDan

Justthinking, is that your contribution? Do you have any level of expertise other than cheap shots from the cheap seats. What i did learn in 8 years of higher institutional education was how to think critically and independently. I do not have to follow the crowd. I follow the evidence. What you fail to recognize is that the study of evolution is science. To accept that evolution is our origin, which is without proof, is religion. People who believe in nothing will believe in anything.

dmilroy

"People who believe in nothing will believe in anything." Science is not about belief but evidence. The evidence of evolution is not only clear but confirmed by multiple lines of research. We can directly observe small-scale evolution in organisms with short lifecycles (e.g., pesticide-resistant insects). Fossils document the existence of now-extinct past species that are related to present-day species. The global distribution of organisms and the unique features of island species reflect evolution and geological change. Species may share similar physical features because the feature was present in a common ancestor (homologous structures). DNA and the genetic code reflect the shared ancestry of life. DNA comparisons can show how related species are. Darwin did not understand the , the genetic basis of speciation and adaptation, and genetic change in response to selection within populations but we do. http://humanorigins.si.edu/evidence/genetics If you studied biology in college, then your aware of the scientific evidence but your religious beliefs prevent you from accepting the evidence. The Bible was written prior to the development of the scientific method. The Bible contains no science. Your religious world view does not impact the robust and compelling evidence of evolution or our understanding of biology.

DieselDan

dMilroy, you have provided not a single example of evolution with the possible exception of micro evolution. The are no examples of fish becoming lizards or lizards becoming mammals. You may exhibit mutations which represent the loss of information not the increase in genetic information. Looking at the long line of dogs from wolves to poodles is not an example of evolution is merely an expression of the natural variability in the canine gene pool and canine dna. For you to accept evolution as science, and no, there is no irrefutable evidence, is belief. You have your own religion. Where do you think mans intellect came from to develop the scientific method? You think it evolved? To accept that hypothesis with no reproducible evidence is proof of your faith and religion. To believe that a simple sea cucumber came from some chemicals that joined to create life and continued to become more complex organisms is simplistic imagination at best. The second law of thermodynamics would preclude that. This is some simple science. Believe as you will. It is very easy to claim x or y over- z without a shred of evidence. Evolutionists want you to believe that because galopogus finches beaks changed within a short period of time that it proves evolution. That proves that the finch can adapt, it is still a finch, a bird. You have no irrefutable proof or evidence; just claims and faith. Romans 1:20-21 For since the creation of the world Gods invisible qualities-his eternal power and devine nature-have been clearly seen, being understood from what had been made, so that men are without excuse. 21. For altjough they knew God, they neither glorified him as God nor gave thanks to him, but their thinking became futile and their foolish hearts were darkened.

Justthinking

Diesel, I’m not going to get into my science background before I joined the USAF,

DieselDan

And yet another non-thinking, unsupported distraction from your unsupported arguement. Telling us of your "scientific" background is not proof of critical thinking. Most examples used in science text books today are the same examples used 40 years ago and were disproven years ago.

DieselDan

Justthinking put your biases adide and watch this...then think. https://youtu.be/Ymjlrw6GmKU thanks

DieselDan

dMilroy, genomics do no prove evolution, in fact most of what we now know of the human genome and genomics and the mathematical improbability of chance represent good evidence that it took a creator to put together dna and that it did not just happen over millions of years. Catch up with the science, which is just information.

Welcome to the discussion.

Keep it Clean. Please avoid obscene, vulgar, lewd, racist or sexually-oriented language.
PLEASE TURN OFF YOUR CAPS LOCK.
Don't Threaten. Threats of harming another person will not be tolerated.
Be Truthful. Don't knowingly lie about anyone or anything.
Be Nice. No racism, sexism or any sort of -ism that is degrading to another person.
Be Proactive. Use the 'Report' link on each comment to let us know of abusive posts.
Share with Us. We'd love to hear eyewitness accounts, the history behind an article.