Today is a celebrated day, and I do think we should celebrate it. Today is the day of Charles Darwin’s birth. Today, I wanted to celebrate his birthday with a letter to the editor of a local newspaper. I wrote the letter and sent it a couple days back. The letter I wrote was very brief. It is a story spanning Darwin’s birth and ending with today’s forbidden conclusion of how we look at evolution. Since I’m not sure if they’ll publish it (it does come down to their decision), I’m going to share it with you below.
Like most letters to the editor, it has to be at or under 250 words. You will notice mine is at 245 words. I really wish I could have added more text, I had more to say.
I wanted to argue that there are mainly two types of evolution in biology. One is biological evolution that we all agree happens. The other is the controversial type which I call Darwinian evolution.
I wish I could have talked about Alfred Russel Wallace, the co-founder of natural selection and evolution — independent co-founder I must add. However, he split with Darwin on a number of interesting things. He would, today, be considered an Intelligent Design advocate. He has been called Darwin’s Heretic.
[easy-tweet tweet=”Alfred Russel Wallace was Darwin’s Heretic” user=”dacurr” hashtags=”DoubtDarwinismDay”]
I would like to have said that, in our experience, mistakes in our writing and language are not helpful in increasing its meaning and value. You remember writing essays in school, or maybe you are writing them now if you are in school. If you randomly change letters and words or if mistakes arise, it hurts your paper, right? The same could be argued with genetic mutation.
I wish I could have talked about materialism’s numerous deficiencies. I wish I could have talked about the persecution of those who reject “from the goo, to you by the way of the zoo.” I wish I could have talked about the modern disjointed and intolerant view of “you can believe in the Creator at church but not in the science lab and the science classroom.” I wish I could have talked about why it is strange that many believe their minds are reliable, but hold to the idea that their brains are the product of random process.
[easy-tweet tweet=”I don’t believe ‘from the goo to you by the way of the zoo'” user=”dacurr” hashtags=”DoubtDarwinismDay”]
Yes, I could have talk on on on. However, as you know, I did have a maximum of 250 words. Thus, I stayed within that number. Below is the letter. Please tell me what you think and feel free to share this post all over social networking. Let’s celebrate this day as the “Doubt Darwinism Day”!
My Letter To The Editor: Darwin’s Provocative Idea And What We Know Today
A little over a hundred and fifty years ago, Charles Darwin jointly proposed the notable idea of natural selection. In addition, he hypothesized all of life came from a common ancestor by way of natural selection.
After Darwin, other processes were also suggested. For example, mistakes and copy errors in DNA (genetic mutation) creates the diversity. Today, Darwinian evolution proposes universal common descent driven primarily by genetic mutation filtered by natural selection.
[easy-tweet tweet=”Celebrate Doubt Darwinism Day with me!” user=”dacurr” hashtags=”DoubtDarwinismDay”]
Then about fifty years ago, we learned life contained extremely large amounts of functional and meaningful information, such as found in DNA and many other structures. They carry programs and recipes that build life’s structures. They tell the organism how to build motors and gears, turbines and generators, heat imaging devices and heat sensors, audio sensors and light sensors. The list goes on and on. Stunning structures stud life. Structures so more advanced than our technology that we try to copy many of them.
However, from universal experience, we know of only one source for large quantities of functional and meaningful information. We know of only one source for new programs, instructions and building plans. We know of only one source for technology like gears, motors and turbines.
It’s not just our intuition, it’s not what we don’t know, but what we do know. The evidence points to today’s most forbidden conclusion. Even after a hundred and fifty years of looking, we know of no naturalistic source. The only known source is intelligence.
[easy-tweet tweet=”Evidence for the Creator is the forbidden conclusion” user=”dacurr” hashtags=”DoubtDarwinismDay”]
Many of us are celebrating Question Evolution Day. 2017 marks the sixth annual event.