So I’m here on my own and think «Hey, why don’t I search wordpress for other blogs about Darwin? Yes, great idea, I’m eager to know other people’s views about the city. Oh boy, here we go!».
Ok, ok, I didn’t literally think those exact words. That would be weird.
Anyway, it still seems a reasonable idea, right? What possibly could go wrong when searching for blogs tagged ‘Darwin’?
The very first link I clicked was about a lady having just visited Darwin. Cool. An introduction about the city’s origins, including a reference to Charles Darwin. Nice. Let’s read more. Something about unproven theory… hummm… subsequent thoughts about everything being created… what?… some analogy about her iPad being created by someone, thus concluding that everything is created… just like an iPad… hey, WTF?
Then I find myself writing a somewhat sarcastic and really not informative comment about how illogical her iPad-argument was. In Phil Plait’s words, I was being a dick. After which she replied in the same tone. Ok – I thought – at least, let’s try writing something in a more positive way. So, I typed this:
Science – including evolution – is really *not* about believing. It’s about coping with evidence. Evolution is not true just because some big shot scientists say it is. It’s our only good theory about this subject because… it’s massively supported by evidence – just as the theory that the earth revolves around the sun. Both theories are supported by evidence – although the later seems a lot easier to grasp (nowadays, because it was not always like that).
*Any* scientific theory is subject to analysis and counter-evidence. If you find some evidence (verifiable evidence, not just because someone says so) that the earth does NOT revolve around the sun, then the original theory would have to adapt to the new data – or it would be simply dropped. That’s how Science works – by definition.
In fact, we know a lot better about evolution than Darwin did. There are massive biological, genetic and archeological evidences that support it – things that Darwin couldn’t dream of. Up until today, no counter-evidence disproved Evolution. Of course, when there is massive evidence about something, it’s kind of difficult having a breakthrough that proves it all wrong. Ironically, the greatest scientific discoveries are the ones that change the way we think about something…
Take Johannes Kepler, for instance. He searched for most of his life for a model that could explain the existing astronomical observations. But the data didn’t fit – he could have dismissed it as observation errors, but he didn’t. Finally, years later and out of desperation, he went against his religious beliefs (that supported a “perfect” astronomical model using circular orbits) and tried using an ellipse model. It worked.
Think again on your argument supporting creationism – if all is created… is there a 1st generation creator? Who created him? I know, most creationists will answer something vague like “he always existed” or something like that – it’s really a mind blocker as it is.
If you bother to google about this, you’ll find many information, including stuff written by biologists – and that will be much more helpful than anything I write. This, for example, was the 1st article I got:
Yeah, I know. This doesn’t get nowhere near the levels of controversy of PZ Myers. Anyway, I did receive a (cordial) reply, explaining that she was a creationist, and always will be. And if she is wrong, she would have lost nothing – while if evolutionists are wrong, they will lose big time.
At that moment, there was really no point trying to rebuke that. I mean, I don’t agree with it, of course – it’s like admitting that:
- Fear is the real reason for her faith.
- Her god is really mean, narcissistic and insecure. History’s worst dictators pale in comparison. Even Alberto João Jardim seems a nice guy next to god. (Sorry to any eventual non-Portuguese reader. Including Madeirenses. Oops, sorry again!)
I also have problems with the ‘would have lost nothing‘ logic. Even if there is a mean, narcissistic and insecure god, how does she know her choice is correct? There are a few mainstream religions today… and since the beginning of civilization we have had hundreds, if not thousands of gods. Statistically, her choice is already wrong. And since most gods are depicted as being extremely jealous and vindictive, specially towards other’s gods believers… if you really want to make a choice based on cowardice (and no, I’m not saying this is the only reason), better don’t compromise with any of them.
But don’t worry, Alberto João Jardim. Even far away, I still believe in you. I mean, that you exist!