Understanding Evolution, Part 1

Saturday, May 23, 2009 by giodasilva.

Science and religion have been at constant odds. I believe that religion was the first method humans had to explain how something worked. It likely goes back to the moment where humans were able to create things, taking the liberty to use “create” as a synonym for “manufacture”. I can only imagine (without evidence, of course, because imagination requires no evidence) that when early humans manufactured tools or were able to harness the power to generate fire, one question would come to the primitive mind: if we made these things and we control them, then what/who made us and controls us? Taking the liberty to imagine myself as an early Homosapien, I would likely see the creator (me) as more powerful than the things that I “created” and could easily destroy. The inference being that there is something more powerful out there that can make us and destroy us.

One basic religious concept that is universal, whether you are discussing the Judeo-Christian tradition or an Eastern religion, is that there was creation. A moment in time when from nothing, the Universe as we know it came to be. Religion across the globe continued this sort of general explanation about the birth and fate of the Universe for many centuries, relying mostly on Aristotelian reasoning (or lack thereof). In an interesting twist of fate, very religious men and women, often funded by the Catholic Church, began to question the workings of the Universe based upon observation and the primitive mathematics available after the Dark Ages. The consequence of which was a friction that would last to this day. As the bastard child of religion, science stopped caring about why, instead focusing on how the Universe worked. Religion is the architect and science is the engineer; one relies upon the other.

The topic of this series is one of the most elegant and often misinterpreted scientific theories in the history of science thus far. When Charles Darwin published The Origin of Species, the devout Christian gentleman set forth a debate that cuts to the very core of humanity: the need to belong. What Darwin unwillingly and unknowingly managed to do was to strike a very sensitive nerve in Western faith. Adam and Eve were no longer viable allegories for the birth of humanity, and now we could explain in detail how humans, or any species on earth, came to be. Evolution unintentionally challenged the concept of a humanity created in the image of the Old Testament God.

As a scientist, I recognize the enormous disconnect between scientific discoveries and their communication to the general public. Perhaps people are turned off by our society’s stereotype of a scientist: the socially-awkward, creepy, reclusive, and often not-so-attractive individual (think Quasi Moto). Looking around at my peers, I generally agree. But stereotypes should not inhibit scientific discourse and understanding. That’s why I’ve written this series about the theory of evolution.

This is not an attempt to persuade or dissuade anyone’s opinion. Rather, it’s an attempt to address misconceptions and offer a clear picture the Theory of Evolution as it stands today. While not scholarly in the traditional sense, I hope that the series perks your interest and inspires you to research this topic. I will be very glad to field any questions in terms of hard science and detailed explanations about the experimental process on an individual basis.

Let’s begin!

Posted in Science! | Print | No Comments »