 | This is an essay. It contains the advice or opinions of one or more Wikipedia contributors. This page is not an encyclopedia article, nor is it one of Wikipedia's policies or guidelines, as it has not been thoroughly vetted by the community. Some essays represent widespread norms; others only represent minority viewpoints. |
Because... science.
The issues being brought up here are perennial issues that have been discussed to death here on Wikipedia. I understand that there are many people in the world who believe in Biblical Creation or do not have the scientific background to understand that patterns and order exist as emergent properties of a dynamic system constrained by rules and therefore think complexity always implies design. That is fine but certain things are true whether you believe in them or not; evolution, gravity and burning yourself if you touch a hot stove are among those things.
Wikipedia exists to document what is known and on scientific subjects what is known is strictly defined as what the scientific experts on a subject say in the peer reviewed literature. In the case of evolution there are absolutely no biologists of any repute who think god-did-it. There are, however, a bunch of charlatans and ideologues who prey on the ignorant and the faithful with things like:
- Evolution violates the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics - No it does not and a basic understanding of thermodynamics makes such claims laughable.
- Can not prove evolution because it is "historical science" and only "observational science" follows the scientific method - Utter sophistry. The people who believe this need to read something other than the introduction to Popper's work. See Scientific method"
- The belief that order implies design, Irreducible complexity, "The Design Filter", "Specified Information" - All utter crap that just boils down to 'I do not understand this so god-did-it.' or 'That is so awesome/amazing/incomprehensible to me' that god-must-have-done-it or a massive lack of understanding of and misapplication of Information theory. None of these make any predictions of their own, and discount all post-Enlightenment science.
- No transitional fossils - See List of transitional fossils.
- Life evolving is as improbable as a tornado in a junk yard making a 747 - Any who take this seriously really need to read a book on Conditional probability
- Oh yeah... my favorite "its just a theory. - There is nothing stronger in science than a well supported theory. Yes they sometimes change or are modified. That is because as more data becomes available and we better understand it the theory is modified to fit reality. The theory of evolution is one of the best supported theories in science.
- Oh, I was wrong. My actual favorite. "What the Bible says is true because God was there and he does not lie." - I do not know where to even start with this one so all I will say is that it is a statement of faith. Faith is fine but by its very definition it is not supported by objective reality. Science, on the other hand, is based entirely on objective reality. Science does not try to answer questions of faith and faith has absolutely no place in solving scientific questions.
All of these arguments have been debunked so many times it is astounding that people keep bringing them up. But that is just fine, individuals are free to be as ignorant as they want. What they can not do is use Wikipedia to spread that ignorance or to give it any seeming legitimacy. Evolution is a fact. There is absolutely no scientific controversy about it being a fact anyone who says so either has no grasp of the science or is just lying. There is are plenty of debates about just how evolution works (see Epigenetics) and we have come a very long way from Darwin but the essential concept of speciation through descent with modification remains true. No proposal to water-down the scientific weight behind evolution, attempt to insert super-natural processes or insert alternate 'theories' about the diversity of life will ever be accepted until and unless the weight of evidence for the new explanation and its ability to explain and predict the diversity of life have been proven to be better than the theory of evolution by many researchers testing and confirming it. This may happen but the smart money says it will not.
All of us have a right to our own faith. But none of us has a right to 'our own science'. Reality just does not work that way.