Metanexus Stance on Evolution Takes Intellectual High-Road
by bipodhttp://www.metanexus.net/metanexus%5Fonline/spiral/#evolution
1. Evolutionary biology is a well established science. Overwhelming evidence indicates that the Earth has a very long natural history in which more complex species evolved from less complex species (and sometimes also the reverse).
2. There are legitimate debates within contemporary evolutionary biology about whether random genetic variations and natural selection alone are able to account for the florescence of life found on the planet. These debates in no way challenge our understanding of a long Earth history and the evolution of species.
[bipod: since when have you heard a general statement about evolution that was so fact based, clear and undeceiving?.]
November 30th, 2005 at 8:33 pm
Wow, clarity over posture for a change. We've all seen comments like "There is legitimate debate over the mechanism of evolution, but not over evolution itself" from NCSE-type talking heads many, many times. But, without fail in my experience, they always leave their meaning obscure, such that the uninitiated can't tell precisely what they mean by "the mechanism of evolution". This is, I think, the very first time I've seen someone say it, and then actually spell out what it means: that the Darwinian mechanism itself, as the sole explanation for life's features, is what is debatable.
Comment by Deuce — November 30, 2005 @ 8:33 pm
December 1st, 2005 at 4:59 pm
bipod: since when have you heard a general statement about evolution that was so fact based, clear and undeceiving?
Depends whether you think "legitimate debates…" refers to things like the relative importance of natural selection verses genetic drift, or whether it might possibly include ID. If the former, then the Metanexus quote is saying almost exactly the same thing as the NCSE statement paraphrased by Deuce. If the latter, then one might suspect Metanexus of being deliberately ambiguous to avoid annoying either evolutionary biologists or ID supporters.
So, I think Deuce's comment about obscure meanings applies to the Metanexus quote as well as the NCSE paraphrase. In fact,it probably also applies to his own comment: Does he use "Darwinian mechanism" as a synonym of natural selection, or does it encompass any evolutionary processes that are not intelligently designed? Ambiguity all round.
Comment by Nick — December 1, 2005 @ 4:59 pm
December 1st, 2005 at 7:38 pm
Hi, Nick, I thought the Metanexus statement was superior to the usual for two reasons. One, they spelled out what is questionable. Two, they spelled out precisely what they do not consider to be on the table: "a long Earth history and the evolution of species". Unless otherwise stated, anything which is compatible with those two things would then be a possibility, unless it conflicts with some other facts.
Comment by Deuce — December 1, 2005 @ 7:38 pm