"A self-styled form of Darwinian fundamentalism has risen to some prominence in a variety of fields, from the English biological heartland of John Maynard Smith to the uncompromising ideology (albeit in graceful prose) of his compatriot Richard Dawkins, to the equally narrow and more ponderous writing of the American philosopher Daniel Dennett . . . . - Stephen Jay Gould, "Darwinian Fundamentalism," The New York Review of Books.
The Washington Post has a piece discussing polls on evolution, creationism and intelligent design in the Sunday Outlook section. You can read it online here.
posted by Lawrence Selden @ 6:40 AM
1 comments
I am a macroevolution agnostic. I used to accept evolutionary theory. Then I looked at the evidence. It became clear to me that macroevolutionary theory is built more on a priori philosophical assumptions than on evidence. Microevolution, on the other hand, is supported by the evidence. The distinction between the two is critical and is largely ignored, or not understood, by the mainstream media and general public.
1 Comments:
The two backbone concepts of biology are Darwinian evolution and the ccellular struture. To teach a biology otherwise is to teach a class in biological plumbing.
Post a Comment
<< Home