Another blow for creationism

2009/03/11 § 4 Comments


charles_darwin_01While I have come to the personal realization that there is no arguing with creationists, because they are not receptive to reason, I do believe that there are undecided individuals out there who just have not yet gotten enough info.

It is somewhat startling to me how so many people believe to have understood the principles of the so called theory of evolution (of course it is not a theory in any non-scietific way, which means it may as well be called the “law of evolution”, as I do, in order to reduce confusion). However, talking to people I again and again have to realize that most people have not understood.

I have neither time nor interest in going into too much detail about it, hence I would like to recommend Richard Dawkins books for a starter. It is a funny fact how people seem to think that the law of evolution is so easy to understand, while they in fact have not the faintest clue what it says. However, one certainty is that people especially struggle to understand how complex structures could have arisen.

Now a new study sheds more light on one complex molecular structure and how it came into existence [1]. It is just beautiful how scientists manage to unravel more and more of these little riddles which ultimately strengthen evolutionary law further. This new study looks at a structure called ribosomes.

“The key breakthrough came when he realized that the ribosome is organized by a set of simple structural rules and that it had to be assembled from basic building blocks in a very specific order; otherwise it would have fallen apart. He then showed with mathematical rigor that the construction of the ribosome likely followed an ordered series of steps to form the structure found in the first living cell. To this day, that structure exists almost unchanged in our own cells.”

A step by step development as we would expect it, of course. Do not get me wrong at all: even without this specific study there is tremendous and absolutely overwhelming and convincing evidence that evolution happened and also how it did generally. My hope is nevertheless that these additional details help some people who still struggle to see the beauty and simplicity the evolutionary law offers in understanding how live functions.

One especially fascinating and convincing talk in this regards has been held by Dr. Ken Miller [2]. NOVA has produced a great documentary about “intelligent design” on trial you should watch [3]!

And if this is not satisfying enough just go ahead and ask a scientist your specific question [4]! I think this possibility is just fantastic and should be used much more by everybody unfamiliar with science or even hostile to science!

—-
1) http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/02/090219105324.htm
2) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JVRsWAjvQSg
3) http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/id/
4) http://www.hhmi.org/askascientist/top_evolution.html

Advertisements

Tagged: , , , ,

§ 4 Responses to Another blow for creationism

  • fivthbeatle says:

    So true! I thought that I understood evolution, then I read Dawkins’ “The Selfish Gene”, and I instantly realized how much I (and most people) really don’t understand.

    This is great!

  • fivthbeatle says:

    (Great links, btw!)

  • elrond says:

    YOU have decided to call it the Law of Evolution? And who are you exactly?

    I am glad your massive intellect has put the whole issue to rest. Another word need not be uttered on the subject:)

    • davidkramer says:

      Check: http://www.notjustatheory.com/

      Two key sentences in that which I want
      to draw particular attention to: “When scientists use the word theory, it
      has a different meaning to normal everyday use.” and “In science, a
      theory is not a guess, not a hunch. It’s a well-substantiated, well-supported,
      well-documented explanation for our observations.”

      Theory in science doesn’t mean guess… that would be a hypothesis.

      Theory is
      demonstrable and demonstrated. A Theory has undergone strenuous tests and proofs.
      And is as such considered as fact unless and until proven wrong.

      Colloquial use
      of the word Theory causes never-ending grief for scientists when they try to
      explain anything to the press or non-scientific public because people’s brains
      have been trained to think of theories as extremely uncertain, whereas they are
      the opposite in science. (That being said there are also scientists who throw it
      around clumsily making the situation even worse)

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

What’s this?

You are currently reading Another blow for creationism at DavidKramer.DK.

meta

%d bloggers like this: