Evolution FAQ Is Evolution Science? Conclusion

-->

• Evolution & Evidence • Evolution & Science • Basics • Evidence: Index

• Related FAQ Links --> • Site Resources • Main Site Index • What is Atheism? • Religion & Theism • Skepticism & Logic • Arguments for / against Gods • Evolution vs. Creationism • Religious Timelines • Hate Mail • Glossary • Book Reviews

• Chat Room Join others in the Agnosticism/Atheism chat!

Several key points have been made in this article:

1. The general theory of evolution (common descent) is overwhelmingly supported by the evidence.
2. Fundamentalist creationism is not indicated by the evidence in any meaningful fashion.
3. Creationist critiques of evolution are generally invalid since they rely on misunderstandings of the science or theory involved.
4. Evolution is a useful science and a powerful conceptual paradigm without which the life sciences would not make sense.

Evolution is overwhelmingly supported by an enormous quantity and variety of evidence. This evidence includes anatomical, embryological and biochemical homologies, the hierarchical relationships of living organisms, the fossil record and biogeographical evidence. The evidence is, at best, not supportive of and generally inconsistent with the idea of independent creation of life forms. Evolution is the unifying principle of the life sciences - "nothing in biology makes sense except in light of evolution."

So, does all of this mean that evolution is necessarily true and creationism is wrong? No, it doesn't. Remember that all science is provisional and evolution is science. Creationist critiques of evolution as not being science are wrong, but there are some points to keep in mind. As we previously pointed out, fundamentalist creationism generally falls outside the bounds of science. Evolution is the only scientific theory of the origin of modern life forms (as opposed to the actual origin of life itself for which there are competing scientific theories, such as several theories of abiogenesis and the theory of panspermia [life from outer space]). In terms of explaining the current diversity of life forms, evolution is the only scientific game in town. Not only is evolution science, but the creationists are just flat out wrong when they say the evidence does not support evolution. Evolution is as well supported a scientific theory as there is.

So, the point is not that evolution is an absolute truth, but rather that evolution is a good scientific theory which is supported by the evidence. If new evidence comes to light, evolution is as subject to change or rejection as any other scientific theory. Since creationism deals with the supernatural it is outside the bounds of science.

Creationism could be right, and the world could have been created by a trickster god who wanted to make it look like evolution happened even though it didn't. Of course, in such an environment anything is possible - the universe might actually be thirty seconds old and we were all created with false memories to make us think it is older. This is just as plausible as creationism - in fact it is a form of creationism. This is why such ideas are not part of science: they are untestable and essentially useless.

However, despite the fact that evolution is good science and is supported by the evidence, creationism has been and continues to be an influence on society. In the next and final article of this series, we will look at how evolution and creationism have played out in society through history to the present and address the issue of what should be taught in public schools.

(A bibliographic list of sources and recommendations for further reading will be coming soon...)

This FAQ information provided by Lance F..

-->