Welcome to the Slaughterhouse: Proof of Evolution?

"If the freedom of speech is taken away then dumb and silent we may be led, like sheep to the slaughter." George Washington

Welcome to the Slaughterhouse, America!!

By Nicholas Meyeres

The Theory of Evolution is just that: a theory. There are holes in it, to be sure. But make no mistake about it, even having said that- evolution is clearly the best explanation we have by far, and it leaves very little room for doubt. In fact, the little doubt that does remain is so astronomically small that it makes one wonder why even have a discussion about it at all. But that is the point of science, and as with all good science, it will remain the best explanation as long as all other scientific disciplines agree with it- which they do for now. Of course, that isn't to say that this won't change. This is because science is ever evolving itself, and leaves no stone unturned. I personally trust that approach in life far more readily than any blind, benighted view that is dictated and never adjusted as we learn and grow over time.



Thus, creationism is neither a science nor a discipline from this standpoint- to say otherwise is deceiving at best. Nor is it terribly rational. It is magic, and we all know magic does not exist. Sure, it’s common knowledge that I don't personally believe in any version of a higher power, but it's not because any scientist told me not to, or for that matter, because I believe in evolution on its own. It is an idea born simply out of reality, and what I see as lending itself to rational and critical thinking. But does that mean that if one believes in creationism their scientific or rational knowledge is severely lacking? Not necessarily.

After all, like I said before, it is a theory- it is not the PROOF of Evolution. But to say that there is no basis for it being a more rational "truth" than, say, a view that a cosmic Zombie Jewish carpenter who was somehow conceived without a father, but who is in some way his own celestial father born of flesh and blood to a virgin; who can also make you live forever only if you symbolically eat his skin and telepathically tell him every night before bedtime that you accept his claim as lord and master over everything in creation; so he can mystically remove the invisible evil force living inside of you like an undetectable tumor all because a woman wearing a fig leaf who was born from a bone fragment and who was convinced by a talking snake to eat a magical fruit from a forbidden tree in a lush, tropical, beautiful garden somewhere in the Middle Eastern desert is laughable.



But is it more laughable than humans evolving from apes? Considering that we have nearly identical DNA as some apes I would say that evolution from this standpoint is much more believable than the other, yes. Is it perfect? Not in the slightest. But we already know (and can see with our own two eyes) that evolution exists all around us without having to take anyone's word for it, and that makes all the difference in the world.

We can see many animals around us that have adapted to their surroundings. We know the Earth has done it's fair share of adaptation, as well. We are aware that plants evolve to suit their circumstances and needs. So, why is it such a leap to believe that we, too, have evolved as a species?

After all, no one knows how old the Earth really is, but geologists were beginning to make estimates that the earth was considerably older than explained by biblical creation long ago. Geologists were learning more about the layers formed by successive periods of the deposition of sediments centuries ago. This suggested a time sequence, with younger layers overlying older layers.

And discoveries of fossils were accumulating during the 18th and 19th centuries. At first naturalists thought they were finding remains of unknown but still living species. As fossil finds continued, however, it became apparent that nothing like giant dinosaurs was known from anywhere on the planet. Furthermore, as early as 1800, scientists pointed out that the deeper the layer of earth, the less similar fossils were to existing species.

And further, we know the world to not be flat today, and that the Earth is not the center of the solar system all thanks to science. But in centuries past we believed it to be so. Again, all thanks to science, we now know the error of our thinking. As a result, I know very few people today that would deny that much, but yet those same few people would deny evolution and the date of the Earth given scientific evidence. Why?



The answer seems to be a simple one for me- willful ignorance. Evidence is something that adds weight to an argument or theory. Proof is absolutely undeniable. Is there proof of evolution? Not in exact terms, no, but there is an abundance of evidence for it. Consequently, there is neither proof NOR evidence for creationism at all. Therefore, in order to believe in creationism all you need is “faith” in your theory, and a healthy dose of skepticism for anything but your point of view and it becomes true in your mind. Willful ignorance.

So, will we ever prove evolution correct without any shred of doubt? Not likely, since that isn't how science really works. Put another way, Nobel Prize winning scientist Linus Pauling aptly described science as “the search for truth”. Plainly put, there is always doubt. But it is far more likely that evolution will be proven much more true than creationism ever will be considering the overwhelming evidence that already exists for evolution and the lack of any shred of evidence for creationism.

In other words, science constantly tries to prove its assumptions to be false and rejects implausible explanations. In this way, scientific knowledge and understanding grow over time. Religious explanations for the order of things are not science because they are based primarily on faith and do not subject themselves to be objectively falsified.

So, when scientists speak of evolution as a theory they do not mean that it is a mere speculation. It is a theory in the same sense as the propositions that the earth is round rather than flat or that our bodies are made of atoms are theories. Most people would consider such fundamental theories to be sufficiently tested by empirical evidence to conclude that they are indeed facts. As a result of the massive amount of evidence for biological evolution accumulated over the last two centuries, we can safely conclude that evolution has occurred and continues to occur to this day.



Having said that, do I believe in evolution hook, line and sinker? Not in the slightest. I just recognize that it is the most palpable theory out there today. If something more reasonable is presented, including proof of creationism, I will gladly and gleefully entertain the idea just as I have entertained the Theory of Evolution. After all, as Thomas Jefferson said, "Question with boldness even the existence of a God; because, if there be one, he must more approve of the homage of reason, than that of blind-folded fear."