see.ludwig.lajuntaschools.orgScience Education on the Edge | Experimenting with student-centered science education

Science Education on the Edge Experimenting with student-centered science education Menu Home About Responding to Scientific Evidence That Disproves Evolution” 3 Replies When I teach my students about the evidence for species change I am often confronted by parents (and students, teachers, and school board members) who want to influence what students will learn. I know that there are people in my community that view the teaching of species change as a threat to their particular brand of Christianity. They may not always confront me face to face, but recently a certain letter was shared with my wife, the local Presbyterian minister. As a geology minor and physical anthropology major in college, she is well qualified to rebut this letter, but she handed it to me and said something like Why don’t you deal with this?” The letter begins As far as scientific evidence that disproves evolution, here are a few science absolutes to consider.” As a science teacher who has a solid faith in the Word of God, I have many questions about this document and what it aims to achieve. What is the purpose of a letter presenting scientific evidence” against species change? Before I discuss the specific arguments in this letter, we should first think about why such a letter exists. The letter is addressed to local ministers and youth pastors and aims to provide scientific evidence that these leaders can use to help defend their members against the claims of naturalistic Darwinian evolution.” The main goal of the letter is to provide evidence for the existence and activity of our Creator God.” Furthermore, the author of the letter believes that we should defend the Bible against claims that it is outdated, inaccurate, unscientific, and out of touch with reality.” The writer ends their letter by offering their services to any congregations or individuals who are interested in nurturing solid faith in the Word of God.” In short, the letter appears to be an attempt to portray belief in the Bible and perhaps God Himself as completely at odds with current scientific theories of biological evolution. What is naturalistic Darwinian evolution” according to the author of this letter? We should also consider the writer of the letter and their use of the phrase naturalistic Darwinian evolution.” Clearly this phrase is used to represent a belief system that is contrary to that of the author. Knowing what I know of the author, I’m going to assume that naturalistic” means without God” or perhaps even against God.” Naturalistic” could also mean random” or unguided.” Darwinian” usually refers to Charles Darwin (not Erasmus) in a way that presents his ideas as some sort of alternative theology that replaces God’s central role in Creation (even though Darwin (both of them) credits a Creator). Evolution” is probably the stickiest word in this phrase. Does the author refer to the fact that species can change over time? Does the author mean to discuss the Big Bang or the origins of life? Unfortunately, the author’s use of the term evolution” is used as a stand-in for many separate scientific concepts including biological evolution, the origins of life, and the origins of the universe. What do biologists really mean by the term evolution?” Species can change over time. In Charles Darwin’s famous words evolution is descent with modification.” This is really the only acceptable answer to the question what do biologists mean by ‘evolution’?” We are not talking about the origin of life or the origin of the universe. Biologists focus on whether or not species can change and adapt to new environments over time. To say that an organism evolves” is to say that it may have very different features multiple generations from now than it does in the present time. Those features are defined by the particular genetic makeup of individual organisms and how likely those features are to aid or hinder the survival and reproduction each individual. Collectively, those features (traits) that are successful in certain individuals will be increased in frequency within an entire population of that organism. Over time, accumulated changes may allow one population of organisms to become significantly different from a separate population of that organism, giving rise to an event known as speciation. In short, biologists have observed that species can change over time and give rise to new, distinct species. What evidence is presented against species change? The letter that was delivered to local churches presents 8 lines of evidence that are said to disprove evolution. Only 4 of these lines of evidence pertain to biological evolution. Three other arguments are aimed at explaining the act of creating the universe and so do not directly address species change. A fourth argument argues against current hypotheses of the origins of life and also does not address species change. There is considerable overlap between the 4 arguments against species change so that all the arguments can be summarized in the following two statements: Species change is so complicated that you could never understand it, therefore it does not happen the way they say it does. New information is required to create new species. There is no new information, therefore no new species can arise. This letter does not describe any evidence for the hypothesis that species of living organisms cannot change and have not changed since they first appeared upon the Earth, i.e. that species have not evolved. While the arguments presented are therefore only in the negative, they are still worth refuting. The argument from complexity One common argument that is often used against modern scientific understandings of phenomena is that Nature is so complex that we could not possibly understand it. The argument from complexity used in this letter appeals to the individual and their experience, knowledge, and their sense of rightness” of a particular belief. This relies upon the perception that if I don’t experience it or understand how it works, then it does not happen the way that other people describe it. Capital S Science” in this mindset refers to all the experts” who have tried to explain the world but have failed or have been wrong multiple times. In the words of the Apostle Paul: Professing to be wise, they became fools Romans 1:22 Global climate change is thought by some to be so amazingly complex that we could never understand how humans are affecting the planet. Likewise, there are so many complex biological systems of interacting atoms, molecules, cells, tissues, organs, organ systems, organisms, populations, communities, and ecosystems that some believe that we could not begin to understand how living things work. But the argument from complexity runs into an unfortunate reality: just because I don’t understand how something works doesn’t mean that no one understands how that system works. In many cases several people have joined together to bounce ideas off of each other through thought and experimentation and have collectively reached conclusions about the most likely mechanisms behind a certain phenomena, for example that diseases are caused by infectious pathogens such as bacteria and viruses. Just because an individual has not personally observed bacteria doesn’t mean that they don’t exist. The existence of bacteria as pathogens is not a matter of faith, but it may have seemed that way at first to the general population when their role in disease was first discovered. The argument that Nature is too complex and that we will never understand whether species change or not does not take into account the fact that many thousands of people have made this study their life’s pursuit for the glory of God through understanding His Creation. Great are the works of the LORD; they are studied by all who delight in them. Psalm 111:2 The argument about biological information Let’s be clear from the start that this argument is...