Based on new #evidence
that functioning #proteins
are extremely rare, should #Darwin’s
theory of evolution be dismissed, dissected, developed or replaced with a theory of intelligent design?
really failed? #PeterRobinson
discusses it with David #Berlinski
, David #Gelernter
, and Stephen #Meyer
, who have raised #doubts
about Darwin’s #theory
in their two books and essay, respectively #TheDeniableDarwin
, and “Giving Up Darwin” (published in the Claremont Review of Books).
asks them to convince him that the term “species” has not been defined by the authors to Darwin’s disadvantage. Gelernter replies to this and explains, as he expressed in his essay, that he sees Darwin’s theory as #beautiful
(which made it difficult for him to give it up): “Beauty is often a telltale sign of #truth
. Beauty is our guide to the intellectual #universe—walking
beside us through the uncharted wilderness, pointing us in the right direction, keeping us on track—most of the time.” Gelernter notes that there’s no reason to doubt that Darwin successfully explained the small adjustments by which an #organism
to local circumstances: changes to fur density or wing style or beak shape. Yet there are many reasons to doubt whether Darwin can answer the hard questions and explain the big picture—not the fine-tuning of #existing
but the #emergence
of new ones. Meyer explains Darwinism as a comprehensive #synthesis
, which gained #popularity
for its #appeal
. Meyer also mentions that one cannot disregard that Darwin’s book was based on the facts present in the 19th century.
Robinson then asks the panel whether Darwin’s theory of gradual evolution is contradicted by the explosion of fossil records in the #Cambrian
period, when there was a sudden occurrence of many species over the span of approximately seventy million years (Meyer’s noted that the date range for the Cambrian period is actually narrowing). Meyer replies that even #population
, the mathematical branch of Darwinian theory, has not been able to support the explosion of fossil records during the Cambrian period, biologically or geologically.
Robinson than asks about Darwin’s main problem, #molecular
, to which Meyer explains, comparing it to digital world, that building a new biological function is similar to building a new #code
, which Darwin could not understand in his era. Berlinski does not second this and states that the cell represents very complex machinery, with complexities increasing over time, which is difficult to explain by a theory. Gelernter throws light on this by giving an example of a necklace on which the positioning of different beads can lead to different #permutations
; it is really tough to choose the best possible combination, more difficult than finding a needle in a haystack. He seconds Meyer’s statement that it was impossible for Darwin to understand that in his era, since the math is…
Based on new evidence and knowledge that functioning proteins are extremely rare, should Darwin’s theory of evolution be dismissed, dissected, developed or replaced with a theory of intelligent design?www.hoover.org