You are here: Evolution vs Creationism -> Timeline -> Jack Penkethman's Column
NOTE: I have taken the liberty of inserting links
to the pertinant parts of the Rodriguez letter.
It's obvious to anyone versed in science that our local anti-evolution letter writers have not taken the time to actually look at the scientific evidence for evolution. Instead they have apparently immersed themselves in creationist propaganda. Not only are their statesments and quotes from scientists out of date but they seem unaware of scientific progress.
Suzanne Rodriguez gives us a laundry list of outdated creationist claims, all of which she would find to be wrong if she would look at the other side of the story.
Rodriguez quotes colin Patterson as stating that there are no transitional forms found in the fossil record. This quote is at least two decades old. At any rate, that he was unaware of transitional forms hardly negates evolution. You don't need transitional forms to show that evolution is a fact.
Suzanne Rodriguez gives us a list of 10 arguments against evolution.
1. The fossil record shows no evidence of evolution - no progression of forms.
Actually it clearly shows a progessive series of living forms which inhabited the Earth through a long history.
2. The "horse series" illustrates that there is no evolution from one species to another.
The horse series certainly has been revised, but that's due to the discovery of continental drift. The old arrangement did not take into account migrations from the New World back to Europe. It's now known that the two continents were once joined. now, after revision, the series certainly does show a convincing pattern for forms.
3. The "ape series" shows that even humans are not evolving.
Boy, I'd sure like to hear why not. Thousands of specimens have been discovered which clearly show a progression of new human-like characteristics.
Actually, new species have indeed been produced in the laboratory and observed in nature. Moreover, natural selection is becoming routinely observable due to advances in data collection, data processing and DNA analysis.
5. Mutations are always negative.
Not true. Many humans carry the mutation for lactose tolerance, for example, which allows some people to digest milk as adults. This mutation is well known.
7. Geologic dating - "fossils date the rocks and the rocks date the fossils." Circular reasoning!
Does Rodriguez really think that scientists are too stupid to recognize simple circular reasoning? I swear, according to anti-evolutinists, scientists are like The Three Stooges in white coats running around the laboratory bumping into each other.
Rock dates are based on radioactive dating, a system which is on very sure theoretical ground.
8. Dating the age of the Earth by chemical means shows the Earth is only thousands of years old.
If this is in reference to chemical means like the salinity of the oceans, then this is truly bogus. The so-called chemical dates proposed by young Earth creationist vary from 100 years to 100,000 years! If anyone cares to look it up, chemical dates have absolutely nothing to do with the age of the Earth.
Guess what. There is a source of energy; the sun. There are other sources of energy; geothermal and geochemical sources. It can be shown very simply, in the laboratory, kitchen or backyard, that system can in fact go from less ordered to more ordered all by themselves.
10. The mathematical chance for the evolution of a complete system/animal is more than astronomical.
No one knows how to compute the chances for life to arise in the first place because no one knows how it happened. Science hasn't gotten that far yet. But that new species arise from existing ones through decent [sic] with modification and natural selection is well established regardless of how life originally got started.
I urge our letter writers to do more study. Look at both sides of the story.
Jack Penkethman is a Gilroy
physicist who is married and has two daughters. his column is published
each Wednesday in The Dispatch