I should have responded to this article on my own site to begin with. Sorry, Jim.
I replied with this post. And a fellow named Ed replied to my comments and labeled me “ignorant” for my thoughts. Here is my response to Ed (and probably a whole host of others.)
I do not think it is “ignorant” to educate oneself on the scientific theories and facts involved in the origin of life debate. Most of my life I believed in evolution and thought it was fact. It was presented to me as proven fact. However, as an adult, I learned that evolution was, in fact, a theory. Not only has it not been proven but the theory has holes the size of the grand canyon in it. Check the science books, and they will use the term “theory” in any definitive contexts with regard to the topic of evolution.
I am not ignorant of the fact that the ideas at the core of evolutionary theory are very broadly accepted. An effect of this is that liberties are taken and the line between fact and conjecture is often blurred. This blurring of lines is what unnerves me and is what I was trying to point out.
I truly am ignorant of many things. But this is not one of them.
I also find it amusing that my views are termed ignorant (and by that I assume you mean I’m something of a crackpot) while the idea that because similar bone patterns in the ears of certain land mammals match those of certain water mammals this “can only mean that the mammals were a genetic lineage that progressively adapted to life in water, eventually becoming whales.”
That’s about as farfetched an idea as any! Which is not to say it couldn’t be true, but simply that there is an acceptance of a belief (or a willing suspension of disbelief perhaps) here. Think about it for a moment: Is it not a bit premature to establish that this is the only conclusion that one can draw from this single piece of physical evidence? I cannot help but be challenged by such ideas. They make me think and reason and reexamine what I already know or think I know. Is that ignorance?
Now, I am not a scientist myself nor am I skilled enough in the art of debate to discuss the physical evidences that would be the center of such an argument on the various scientific (or otherwise) theories of which I am referring. But from what I recall about the scientific method, opinions were not deemed fact until proven.
I am aware that not “buying into” evolution as fact (at least not all of it) makes me a member of an extremely small minority. Is it possible that you consider me ignorant because I believe something (obviously) different than you? Is there a difference between an idea that you consider to be stemming from ignorance and one that comes from divergent thinking or a cultural difference or an ethnic tradition?
What happened to open-mindedness and welcoming of multiple perspectives and views? Isn’t that what these global conversations that are taking place over the internet are all about!? Or do you just want people to agree with you on everything!?
