What do you
know about evolutionary theory? Or, maybe there are two questions here: what do you think
you know, and what do you actually know?
In reality,
if people are honest about the matter - and quite irrespective of whether they believe in
evolution or they are opposed to it - most individuals probably would have to acknowledge
that they know almost nothing at all about the actual nuts and bolts of the issues at the
heart of evolutionary theory. Their belief concerning this matter - whatever the character
of that belief may be - is, for the most part, rooted in two sources: (1) a largely
unexamined acceptance of the opinion of others; (2) the extent to which evolutionary
theory makes continuing on with the rest of their philosophical or religious perspective
easier or more difficult.
In addition,
the controversy surrounding evolutionary theory has been plagued by the fact that most of
the advocates for various sides of this issue have been conducting the discussion on the
wrong level of engagement. More specifically, people have been arguing mostly in terms of
the evidence of paleobiology, or the anatomic/fossilized data that has been drawn from
zoological and botanical studies, and, unfortunately, the matter cannot be settled, one
way or the other, with any degree of certitude when approached in this manner.
On this
level of discussion, one, at best, can obtain data which is either consistent with, or
raises problems for, evolutionary theory. However, there is no smoking gun (either for or
against) to be found - just self-serving and heated rhetoric which is cast in the garments
of apparent rigor.
Furthermore,
contrary to what many people believe, Darwin has nothing at all to say about either the
origins of species or the origins of life in general. The entire argument in his
universally known, but largely unread, book is not about the origin of species but about
the plausibility of a form of argument which alludes to such a possibility without ever
spelling out the mechanism.
Natural
selection acts on what is. It presupposes what is.
Natural
selection does not cause what is, but, rather, helps determine which aspects of what is
will continue to be. Natural selection introduces nothing new into the evolutionary
picture, but only says something about the aspects of that picture that are most consonant
with the existing dynamic of interacting natural forces.
Therefore,
the cause of that which natural selection comes to act upon still stands in need of an
explanation. You cannot use natural selection as an explanation for that which natural
explanation clearly presupposes without becoming entangled in completely circular thinking, and this certainly does not constitute an explanation of any kind.
Moreover,
the idea of the accumulation of small variations does not really account for either the
origins of life in general, or for the origins of the different biological blueprints, so
to speak, on which the notion of species difference is based. Since variation presupposes
that which is capable of such variation, what needs to be explained is the origins of the
capacity for variation.
Genetics is
not the science which provides an account of the story of the origins of this capacity.
Rather, genetics is merely the science which delineates how such a capacity operates once
it has arisen.
Only with
the advent of modern molecular and cellular biology have we finally come into contact with
the sort of information which allows one to make insightful judgements about the
plausibility of evolutionary theory as an adequate account for the origins of life on
Earth. When one integrates the disciplines of molecular and cellular biology with data
derived from geology, hydrology, meteorology, and cosmology - along with what has been
learned about organic and inorganic chemistry - then one is in a position to work toward
an informed understanding concerning the questions which surround and permeate the
possibility of whether the modern neo-Darwinian theory of evolution offers an acceptable
paradigm with which to approach origin of life issues.
In The
People Versus Wayne Robert Corrigan: Evolutionary Theory On Trial one will find a
complete overview of all of the basic data, evidence and arguments which converge on the
issues at the heart of evolutionary theory as a plausible account for the origins of life.
This overview is a prelude to a much more comprehensive work which is currently in
preparation, but the overview does permit a first glimpse of what must be grasped in order
to be in a conceptual position to be able to arrive at informed judgements - whether pro
or con - about evolutionary theory.
In
contradistinction to the original Scopes "Monkey" trial when John
Scopes, a high-school science teacher, was put on trial for teaching material at odds with
the Biblical account of the origins of man, Robert Corrigan, a fictional character, has
been put on trial for teaching material which is inconsistent with modern evolutionary
theory. However, the defendant in this case is not a Creationist, nor is his argument an
expression of what has come to be known as "Creationist Science".
This
overview is not about trying to prove the truth of this or that religious account of the
origins of either human beings, in particular, or life, in general. The People
Versus Wayne Robert Corrigan or Evolution on Trial is about the process of
interpreting empirical evidence and subjecting that data to various methods of critical
reflection.
Unlike works
such as Inherit the Wind which is largely the account of a clever
lawyer's legalistic and philosophical dismantling of the simplistic arguments of
a rather flawed personality who desired to be regarded as a defender of the faith, The
People Versus Wayne Robert Corrigan addresses issues of science and whether or not
science, as presently understood, can be said to demonstrate the validity of evolutionary
theory. As such, this overview focuses on the issue of evolutionary theory itself and does
not get sidetracked with irrelevant considerations, however interesting these later twists
and turns may be in purely human terms.
I will tell
you three things about Evolution on Trial which are true. First, it
contains a lot of technical material. Secondly, everything that is necessary
for understanding this material has been included within the context of the direct and
cross examinations which take place during the trial and, as such, it is a largely
self-contained work.
However, it
is not the sort of discussion that one can rush through. As with anything else that is
worth the effort - and we believe this work is worth the effort - The People Versus
Wayne Robert Corrigan takes time to digest and appreciate.
If you are
ready to make the commitment to attempt to come to grips with the essential issues of
evolutionary theory, then Evolution on Trial is waiting to be accessed. Be
the first kid on your block to actually know what one is talking about when the
conversation turns to evolutionary theory - and this, actually, brings us to the third true thing, alluded to previously, about Evolution On Trial that can be said.
More specifically, if an individual cannot grasp the point-counterpoint of the discussion in this E-Book, then, one is not in a conceptual position to honestly argue either for, or against, evolutionary theory. Whatever one might have to say on such issues will be entirely derived from the opinions of others - opinions that may, or may not, be true and concerning which one will have no direct, personal understanding, knowledge or insight.
