| 
 Notes on Science and Evolution 
 
 
1. Four grades of    scientific speculation 
        a. description of    repeatable, observable phenomena - science has maximum credibility,    though fallible 
        b. interpolation -    assumes simplicity (without accepted definition or justification) - agreed    upon in application and relatively safe 
        c. extrapolation -    beyond tested boundaries - relatively daring - e.g. “cosmological    hypothesis,” constancy of physical “constants” 
        d. deep theory -    postulating unobservable entities on the sole ground that they would explain    observations - e.g. molecules, particles, etc., the Big Bang, the id 
  Moving from a tod    increases distance from the evidence and thus lowers credibility - we must    become critical consumers of science 
        2. Scientists accept    theories as true on the basis of inadequate evidence: Michaelson said in 1903    that physics is finished; Born said the same in 1928; Gamov said there is    nothing smaller than particles (last ed. 1967!); paleontologists at La Brea;    dumb, cold-blooded dinosaurs; oxygen/carbon-dioxide balance without    quantitative analysis.  
        3. Although religion    deals with many issues not directly relevant to science (the spiritual, the    metaphysical, values, worship, etc.), it also makes assertions concerning    matters of physical fact. In those assertions there can be conflict between    science and religion. For Judaism this includes the age of the universe and    the theory of evolution. 
        4. Solution to the    problem of the age of the universe - the Jewish date 5756 is the age of the    universe; the scientific date is the result of analyzing misleading data    created by G-d 
        (1) “Why would G-d do    that?” (a) the question is not relevant; (b) we can answer: to hide His    presence; He told us the truth so He is not deceiving us 
        (2) “Would that not    undercut all investigation?” Only if unconstrained - compare investigating    claim of frame-up in law 
      5. The theory of evolution    and its relation to Judaism 
        a. assume a certain order    of appearance of life forms on earth - these are the facts which the    theory of evolution is supposed to explain 
        b. the theory says: (1)    there was a first nearly perfect self-replicator; (2) some of its mistakes in    self-copying improved the copy’s ability to copy itself; (3) scarcity of    resources with which to make copies creates competition between the    self-replicators; (4) eventually only the better self-replicators will    remain...until (2) repeats the process. 
  The central claim:    (1)-(4) suffice to explain the existence and history of life. 
        c. G-d could have created    the same sequence of life-forms, so there is no contradiction between that    sequence and Judaism, but if the central claim is true then the existence    of life is not evidence for G-d. 
        6. Problems with the    theory of evolution 
        a. originally adopted    against both the best current age of the earth and the conception of    inheritance as blending, and missing its own crucial fossil evidence - this shows    the bias of the scientific community in favor of the theory [better any    naturalistic explanation than scientific bankruptcy!] 
        b. the theory asserts    that life is the result of unguided, accidental, “random,” processes without    providing an estimate of the probability of success - the theory is not    precise enough to be evaluated for credibility  
        c. misuse of data -    black/white moths - no new forms implies no support for evolution;    persistence of white form implies (extremely weak) evidence against evolution 
        d. misuse of data -    “evolution” of bacteria resistant to antibiotics, insects resistant to    insecticides- can be explained without evolution if a subpopulation were    already resistant 
        e. misuse of data - the    gap between micro-evolution and macro-evolution 
        f. homology [def. limbs    or organs with similar structure serving different purposes] 
        - the claim: evolution    (common descent) and nothing else can explain homology - both parts of    the claim are false: (1) evolution cannot explain homology since homologous    structures have dissimilar genetic coding (due to pleiotropy) and    embryological development; (2) usefulness and “parallel evolution” are    alternative explanations 
        g. fossil record lacks    intermediary forms - theory of “punctuated equilibria” explains why we will    not find evidence of its truth [!] - does nothing for big gaps  
        (fox-like mammal to    whale; insects; flowering plants; etc.) 
        h. most extinctions due    to catastrophes - no evidence of any extinctions due to competition 
        i. no credible (even    hypothetical) account of the origin of the first self-replicator,  
        DNA/proteins, the cell,    human intelligence 
        j. the best available    theory should be accepted only if it has enough evidence to be credible  
        k. CONCLUSION: The    theory of evolution is too poorly defined and supported at present to be    accepted as true. [It is NOT claimed that the theory is disproved, and NO    SUPPORT IS CLAIMED FOR “SCIENTIFIC” CREATIONISM] 
  CLICK    HERE FOR NOTES AND SOURCES 
      
    
   |