Mailbag: Evolution and God, Part 4

From: "Martin"
Subject: The Everlasting Man

okay, sure maybe we can look at some amateur websites or discussion forums where amateurs congregate to say that there is proof of evolution. maybe they will use some bones as examples.. but in reality, there is not enough evidence. we see a skull at the museum and the card next to it says "here is our ancestor" but where is the rest of his body? just coz he has an oddly-shaped head doesnt mean he is necessarily something between an ape and a man does it? maybe this guy was just a weirdo? i may be wrong. i am no archeologist.

If we can find discussion about proof of evolution on amateur websites, it is only because there is so much more discussion about proof of evolution in science text books, science journals, science labs, among scientists, and just about everywhere else the biological sciences are studied or taught. There is as much evidence for evolutionary theory as there is for any other scientific theory - for example atomic theory, quantum theory, or plate tectonics. There is more than enough evidence for anyone who understands and accepts science to also accept that evolution is real and occurs.

It is true that Martin is no archaeologist. Martin is no scientist whatsoever if Martin thinks that merely having an oddly shaped head is sufficient for actual scientists to argue that a skull belonged to a creature that predated our own species, but was still related to our species. Quite a lot more goes into such studies - enough for us to reasonably conclude that the former owner of the skull wasn't simply a "weirdo."

it is these facts that g.k. chesterton considers, but of course he goes into far greater detail, something which i cannot do here with what time i have. i suggest you go so far as reading the first couple of chapters maybe. unless of course you dont want to know the truth. you dont want to see the bigger picture.

I have not read the G.K. Chesterton book The Everlasting Man - but not, as Martin suggests, because I "don't want to know the truth." Rather, it is because I honestly don't see any purpose in doing so. The book was written long before much modern work on evolutionary theory was done, so it's not as though he is going to have much to say that is very relevant anymore. In addition, according to Martin the book is concerned primarily with addressing the idea that people reject religion merely because of evolution. But because I don't hold to that view, it hardly seems relevant to me.

All-in-all, then, I don't see that I'd get anything out of it. I already read quite a lot - often two, three, or four books each week. Why put off reading something that is current and relevant in favor of Chesterton's work? I can't think of a single reason right now - so I don't bother.

Part five of this conversation on evolution, atheism, and religion will appear tomorrow. Part three appeared yesterday.

More selections from the Agnosticism / Atheism Mailbag...