Evolution vs. Creationism

Creationism is patently false. Evolution is no more theoretical than gravity.

They Say: Evolution is a debated and controversial topic!

Between 2001 and 2008, The Discovery Institute gathered signatures of 761 scientists that expressed skepticism about Darwinian evolution. This was meant to show the controversy of the theory. However, only about 80 of those scientists had expertise in the a field relevant to evolution. This survey represents only 0.023 percent of the scientific community.

In 2005, a similar survey was taken to find scientists in support of Darwinian evolution. This petition gathered 7,733 supporters in 4 days. 4,066 had PhDs. 3,385 had ‘biology’ in their title. 68% of those signing work in biology related fields (about 5,258).

Since 2005, “Project Steve” has gathered signatures of over 1,100 scientists named Stephen (or some variation thereof, like Steven, Stephanie, Esteban, etc) who are in support of Darwinian evolution.

The “debate” over evolution exists only in the political and public spheres, not in the scientific one.

They Say: Just because a theory is accepted by a lot of people does not mean that it is correct! Most people on the planet thought the Earth was flat at one time, and that was certainly wrong.

Correct, the number of people agreeing with a position does not control its accuracy. However, this is an oversimplification of the situation. It is not that “a lot of people agree with the theory”, it’s that the overwhelming majority of the scientific community (we’re talking in the 98% range here), especially within the field of biology, agrees with the theory. These are people who study and test the theory extensively. Their acceptance of the theory is based on evidence and observation. We have literally witnessed the processes of evolution first hand. This is not the same as the vast majority of the un-educated world (which composed of scant few astronomers and astrophysicists) agreeing that the world is flat; this is an example of virtually every expert in the relevant field coming to a consensus.

They Say: Creationism is a competing scientific theory that should be considered on equal grounds with evolution.

Creationism is not a scientific theory. Creationism is based on dogma first and on evidence second. There is some evidence that can be seen as supportive of Creationism, and Creationists are quick to site such evidence. However there is a vast ocean of evidence that refutes Creationism. This evidence is ignored by Creationists. If evidence were to be found or observed that showed a creature literally being created from nothing, in its current form, it would refute Darwinian evolution. Is there any evidence that could be provided that would refute Creationism, in the eyes of a Creationist? No. That is because they are teaching dogma, not science. They have assumed the truth of their hypothesis, and only gather and accept evidence that supports that hypothesis while ignoring anything that does not.

They Say: Creationism (in some form) should be addressed in our public science classes as a possible explanation for the Earth and universe.

The Supreme Court disagrees. See: State of Tennessee v. Scopes (1925), Epperson v. Arkansas (1968), Daniel vs. Waters (1975), McLean v. Arkansas (1982), Edwards v. Aguillard (1987), and Kitzmiller v. Dover (2005). The Supreme Court has consistently ruled that (1) teaching Creationism and (2) forbidding the teaching of evolution in public schools, is unconstitutional.