Darwin's Doubt: The Explosive Origin of Animal Life and the Case for Intelligent Design (2013)
Author: Stephen C. Meyer
Author: Stephen C. Meyer
Alert: For Mature Readers Only
Discretion Advised
What triggered to look into this book was Zakir Naik's emotional argument with a self-professed atheist who was born Muslim on the theory of Evolution. The atheist challenged the rejection of Darwin's theory in Islam. The discourse went personal as Dr Naik started questioning the seeker's basic understanding of science and its terminologies. Then on, it became farcical, and the session had to be terminated. It was harbouring on diabolical issues like whether the theory of gravity was a mere theory or a fact and how scientific facts differ from theories.
A paragraph in sciencemag.org succinctly summarises the journey a scientist goes through in his thirst to know the truth. The intentions are nevertheless always altruistic, but sometimes personal agendas come in the way. They cherrypick what they want to see to prove their assertions. The beauty of it all is all these are subject to debates and changes as more information is obtained with newer instruments being their disposal.
The power of scientific reasoning derives from the complex interplay between the desire to know, the ability to reason, and the ability to evaluate ideas with data. As scientists, we have learned how to make ideas dance with reality, and we expect them to be transformed in the process. We typically add to what we already know, often showing along the way that old ideas are incomplete or, occasionally, wrong. And so we collectively build an understanding of the world that is accurate, reliable, and useful.
https://science.sciencemag.org/content/341/6152/1344.1In the greater scheme of the genesis of life on Earth, there was an era named Cambrian explosion. It is said organisms before this time were very rudimentary in morphology and function (beginning 4.6 billion years ago). Fossils from the Cambrian era (541 million years ago) are complex and have morphed into multiple phyla. The point the author is highlighting is that these changes are too profound for it to happen by mere chance. Subtle changes in genetic take a mighty long time and are gradual to perfect. Many significant alterations in DNA sequence and protein productions lead to lethal outcomes anyway.
To produce a groundbreaking change in archetypal design, pure random mutation is not sufficient. The presence of intelligent design is required, according to the author.
It is a point to note that when Darwin proposed his theory, the knowledge about Mendelian trait of inheritance and of DNA was not at his disposal. All he was offering was that organisms morph to adapt and to survive in an environment that only caters for the fittest.
Many of the theories proposed by Neo-Darwinists who have incorporated state of the art knowledge and suggestions do not satisfy the author. He tries to show that approaches like Punctuated Equilibrium (with rapid changes in speciation), trans-generational epigenetic inheritance and Shapiro's Natural Genetic Engineering do not nullify the need for an intelligent designer.
It is clear that when he means an intelligent designer, he says God, but a cheeky atheist like Richard Dawkins would ask, who designed the Designer? Meyer challenges that if gravity can be accepted as a scientific fact, why not the concept of intelligent design? Scientists, however, look at it as a lazy way of throwing in the towel. The likes of conservative thinkers see it as an opportunity to legitimatise the concept of God in science and start teaching Biblical Creations in schools as a scientific fact.
 |
The Cambrian seas teemed with new types of
animal, such as the predator Anomalocaris (centre)
© John Sibbick/Natural History Museum
|
Cross-referencing with other science-related websites is a revelation. At the beginning of times, lifeforms were simple self-sufficient ones. They divided by simple division, and the oceanic oxygen concentration was extremely low. With the marginal increase in oxygen concentration in the oceans, cells, which mainly thrived in an anaerobic environment, found aerobic respiration more efficient. Organisms became bigger. For sustenance, for the first time, the concept of preys and predators came forth. Living beings developed exoskeletons and other means of survival.
The beauty of science is that it can be challenged but supported with equally thought-provoking pieces of evidence. Admittedly, Man's knowledge is limited, but our desire to entertain new thoughts and ideas is a single fact that managed to springboard our species as the de facto leader of the planet. Or is it because He created us in his mould?
Comments
Post a Comment