EVERY THEORY IS NOT FACT
New York, NY- Like the ongoing Floyd Mayweather-Manny Pacquiao debate, the classic debate that pits religion against science when arguing for or against the ‘Theory of Evolution‘ has its similarities. There are faith based ideals pushing arguments and observable facts as well. Both cite evidence, but can anything be proven as fact?
THEORY VS. FACT
The Theory of Evolution is a brilliant concept which explains the origin of species and a linear progression of mankind. It is generally accepted as fact by most scientists due to its relatively simple explanation and a strong pillar of support called adaptation. Adaptation is observable, factual and documented. We know for example that spending an excessive amount of time barefoot will result in harder and generally more calloused feet. We also know that living in elevated climates can increase and strengthen endurance due to the lungs adjusting to thicker air. But can we say with certainty that fish walked on land? That mankind is undoubtedly smarter than he ever was in the past? No, because ‘Evolution’, like the ‘Big Bang’ and ‘Relativity’ must be labeled as theories because they cannot be observed as fact. So in part, these beliefs are based on faith, acceptance of concepts and ideas that are not necessarily proven.
RELIGOUS HISTORY & FACT
When it comes to religion, there is reference material generally referred to as The Bible, Torah (and Dead Sea Scrolls) which either include, support or leave out material divided between old and new testaments. The Bible includes both testaments, while the Torah is generally the Old Testament of the biblical account. These are at times observable facts, due to a documented history by other groups and cultures writing down things that coincide with each other. The Romano-Jewish writer Titus Flavious Josephus, for example is said to account for the existence of ‘Jesus’ and documented other historical events generally believed to be true by Jews and Christians. But does everything in the Bible hold up to scientific facts? Many stories in the bible can be understood to be parables or allegories rather than fact. It’s illogical to think that Noah would not have been able to build an ark and house every species (male and female) of every living thing on the planet. But to some, it’s believed to be true based on faith.
WHY NO ONE IS RIGHT!
A fact is an understanding of something that is described as true based on observation and belief. The Loch Ness Monster for example is not a fact because there is no evidence that is strong enough to support it with certainty. While there are many such examples to pull from the Bible, is this not also true concerning the Theory of Evolution? In order to prove evolution, we need to observe it. Since its something that is said to occur over millions of years the best evidence are fossils. But these fossils have not produced a missing link. Since evolution happens over time a link between changes in species should be fossilized and accounted for, especially considering the amount of species that can be used for examples. The fact that missing links cannot be observed presents a problem for Evolution and keeps it from becoming a fact, although some people believe it as such.
A PROBLEM WITH EVOLUTION
When we look at evolution it is generally understood to be a change for the best or an upgrade from a previous state out of necessity. But it does little to explain why some species would remain in the same state while others would gradually become something entirely different. If all living things have an instinct to survive, what is the explanation for physiological changes happening with group A as opposed to group B? And if modern man is the most evolved out of every man before him, how do we explain massive pyramid structures, Stone Henge and other baffling phenomenon which obviously we’re understood in the past. How did man go through the Middle Ages after Ancient Greece and Rome if evolution is on a continuum for survival and progress? Why are there reports that contradict previous understandings of human lineage?
Fossils Make A Topic For Debate.
In a New York Times article in 2013 (http://mobile.nytimes.com/2013/10/18/science/fossil-skull-may-rewrite-humans-evolutionary-story.html) scientists found skulls of ancestral humans believed to be much older and ancient than skulls found in the same time period with what were thought to be further evolved species in a much later time period. In essence ancient man apparently existed with prehistoric man at the same time. While this is not enough to discard the Theory of Evolution altogether, is does contradict with what most scientist believed before this discovery. The articles goes on to suggest, just like we are varied on appearance today, ancient man had different variations of ancestral humanity that also existed on the planet at the same time. No missing like here. Just like the now extinct dodo bird is not considered to be an ancestor of a modern chicken, we can conclude through observation that both birds existed at the same time.
CONCLUSION
When considering religious beliefs and evolution, the truth appears to be somewhere in between or possibly separate altogether. Just like we will never know for sure if Manny Pacquiao used PED’s or if Floyd Mayweather has nightmares of losing his first bout, some things are simply left to opinion despite the facts or circumstantial evidence that may or may not support either belief.
Jarrad Woods
SWEET SCIENCE & EVOLUTION