Why Evolution Works (and Creationism Fails)

Chapter 2: The Structure of This Book

14 Chapter 2 The Structure of This Book One cannot help but be in awe when contemplating the mysteries of eternity, of life, of the marvelous structure of reality. It is enough if one tries merely to comprehend a little of the mystery every day. —Albert Einstein A modest fraction of this book is devoted to refuting all varieties of creationism. Hence, we discuss, in chapter 3, a “History of Creationism and Evolutionary Science in the United States.” Before the development of modern science, nearly everyone was a creationist, in a sense. But even those who believed in the Bible literally saw the necessity to interpret it so that their understanding of the Bible was consistent with scientific facts as they were understood at the time. Thus, when the antiquity of the earth became apparent, theologians proposed, for example, that the days of the creation might have been eons and not literal twenty-four-hour days.When the theory of evolution posed a new threat, it became one factor that brought about a more literal interpretation of the Bible. In the mid-twentieth century, the little-known pseudoscience of flood geology evolved into creation science, and its proponents engaged in political activity designed to force creation science into the public schools alongside evolutionary biology. When courts deemed creation science to be religion, not science, it evolved again, this time into intelligent-design creationism. In chapter 4, we show “How ScienceWorks.” In a nutshell, scientists make hypotheses and then compute or deduce specific, detailed consequences of those hypotheses.They then carry out experiments or make observations to test whether the consequences of their hypotheses are correct. If so, then the hypotheses are tentatively accepted. More experiments or observations and more hypotheses follow in order to verify or refine the original hypotheses. Sometimes an observation or experiment precedes a hypothesis.Some hypotheses are rejected,others accepted.When enough hypotheses have been accepted and we have a large body of knowledge, then we say that we have a successful theory. Additionally, by performing experiments, making observations, and Ch002.qxd 3/26/09 5:25 AM Page 14 The Structure of This Book 15 testing hypotheses, science constantly uncovers new facts and is fruitful in a way that pseudoscience and creationism are not. In science, a theory is a comprehensive body of knowledge, hypotheses, and deductions that explain a broad range of facts. It is often mistaken to be a mere notion, an untested idea, as when someone says,“I have a theory about why they lost the game.” In general, a mature theory is so complex and has so many interwoven strands of evidence that we cannot ask whether a theory is correct or incorrect. Rather, we may ask whether a given hypothesis can be tested. Sometimes, a hypothesis is rejected, but that does not mean that the overall theory is wrong, only that some aspect needs further investigation. Most important, we do not reject a well-supported theory just because we have found some flaws.And—creationists must understand this point—we do not accept a rival theory by default but rather subject it to scrutiny by proposing specific hypotheses, deducing consequences, and testing those hypotheses .To date, no competitor to the theory of evolution has been subjected to such scrutiny. It is very hard to define what is science and what is not; the boundary between science and nonscience is often fuzzy. It is perhaps easier to distinguish between science and pseudoscience, as we do in chapter 5, “How Pseudoscience Works.” We note specific properties that make an endeavor pseudoscience: untestable or far-fetched hypotheses; denial of known fact; intention to show that something is true, rather than find out whether it is true; and sometimes the belief that the establishment is conspiring against the pseudoscientist. In chapter 5, we expand on these themes with reference to two specific pseudosciences: homeopathic medicine and astrology.As we will see, pseudoscientists “know” in advance the answer they are trying to get and will not be swayed by facts or logic. In chapter 6,“Why Creationism Fails,” we look at classical scientific creationism , that is, the predecessor to intelligent-design creationism. Youngearth creationists believe that the universe is approximately 10,000–20,000 years old (though some still stick to the biblical age of 6,000 years) and that Noah’s flood was real and worldwide.They account for the stratification we find in the fossil record by citing unspecified hydrodynamic forces and also...