by Bill Nugent
by Bill Nugent
One of the more grandiose claims of secularists is the assertion that evolution is “the basis of all science.” Evolutionists claim that it is impossible to do meaningful research in biology, chemistry, geology and other fields without evolution as a backdrop. The Darwinists claim that evolution “joins all the sciences together.” This is why secularists insist that school children must be taught evolution in dogmatic fashion without criticism.
Evolution does provide a philosophical backdrop to all of the sciences if you are secular in your outlook. I will show in this article that evolution offers virtually nothing in the way of practical support for scientific research.
Evolution, since it deals with speculation about events alleged to have occurred in the distant past is technically in the category of history, not science. Evolution is a hypothesis of natural history. History is not science. History is art. The academic discipline of history is more properly called a liberal art. Evolution is the art of the storyteller.
Did you ever notice that when you read of a stunning new fossil discovery that the discussion of the fossil involves a story of a series of events that supposedly occurred millions of years ago?
For instance, the fossil “Lucy,” was supposed to be a human ancestor and the evolutionists who reported the find did much creative speculation as to how she looked, what she ate, where, when and how she lived. All this artful extrapolation came from the analysis of a few bones. As other, more complete skeletons of the same species were found many prominent evolutionists including Zuckerman and Oxnard of Britain concluded that Lucy and similar skeletons were of an ordinary species of ape.
Evolution may call upon the science of chemistry to discover facts about a fossil to buttress an historical claim about the fossil but evolution itself is natural history.
The claim that it is impossible to do science without evolution is really a reflection of the fact that most universities have embracedphilosophical naturalism as a guiding philosophy. Evolution is the origins myth of philosophical naturalism. Evolution, since it is a theory of history and deals with the past, is regarded by the academics as being the foundation of the present and future.
Philosophical naturalism is the idea that nature is all that exists. It is a denial of God and a denial of the supernatural. It regards only those things that can be perceived by the senses as real. The origins myth, evolution, is the claim that random collisions of atoms in the primordial ooze formed the first living cell and that cell evolved into higher forms of life by random mutations.
Philosophical naturalism also includes the concept of Darwinian reductionism. Darwinian reductionism is the claim that humans have no souls and no conscious existence after death. They claim that music evolved from mating calls. They claim that morals, ethics and law evolved from herd survival instincts and tribal preservation tactics. Darwinism reduces humans to mere hairless apes with no souls, no dignity and no future.
With the above definition of philosophical naturalism you can see the absolute centrality of evolution in their thinking. If evolution is refuted as a theory, their whole edifice of unbelief crumbles.
In most contemporary American and European universities all facts are viewed through the lens of philosophical naturalism. All scientific facts are viewed through the lens of evolution. Evolution is therefore the philosophical presupposition of science in the universities. It is certainly not the scientific basis of modern science. A presupposition is a starting assumption that is never questioned.
The facts of geology are interpreted through the presupposition of evolution. Secular geologists tend to ignore the mounting evidence for young earth and adhere to the dogma of an old, multibillion year age of earth. To date a rock layer, geologists will often use an index fossil to estimate its age. For instance, if a fossil of an ancient pine tree commonly called Dinosaur pine is found in the layer the geologists will give it an age estimate in the millions of years. (Radioactive dating is also done but that can be time consuming, expensive and give conflicting results.)
A scientist outside the field of geology, such as a paleontologist, will estimate the age of a dinosaur pine based on what he or she reads in a geology journal. So they engage in circular reasoning. The geologist looks to paleontology to get the age for the rock layer and the paleontologist looks to geology to date the fossils. This circular reasoning, when it is presented in an academic way, appears sophisticated. It gives the impression that the ages associated with paleontology are “confirmed” by geology and vice versa. Thus the sciences are “joined” by evolutionary assumptions.
By the way, dinosaur pine trees have been found alive in Australia! They are even available for purchase. Just google “dinosaur pine” and you can see it for yourself!
Then there’s the often tragic application of evolution to medical science. One example is how physicians dealt with low back pain by trying to straighten out the lower spine. The lumbar region of the spine is curved inward. This natural curvature is called“lordosis.” Surgeons who applied evolution to back therapy claimed that the curvature of the spine was due to the assumption that humans evolved from four footed mammals. When humans began to walk erect the curvature of the spine remained as a vestige and gave poor support to the upper body according to evolutionary theory.
Doctors used various techniques to straighten the lower back to remove lordosis. The results of this approach was increased pain and poor structural support of the back. These techniques have largely been abandoned. There are other examples of evolution applied to modern medicine with tragic results. Tonsils were once thought to be evolutionary vestiges. We now know that tonsils are part of the immune system. There was also a knee surgery procedure based on evolutionary assumptions that gave counterproductive results.
Evolution makes a poor philosophical backdrop for science. Modern science arose during the 1600s in post-reformation Europe when the Bible was made available to millions of people. All of the founders of the major branches of science were Bible believing Christians. The Bible reveals God as a God of order and as lawgiver. Christian men of science such as Newton and Bacon rightly saw God’s laws of nature as being fixed and orderly. Thus they saw the relevance of scientific experimentation and developed the scientific method. No other world religion such as Hinduism or Buddhism could provide the worldview backdrop to allow for the rise of the scientific method. All of the branches of science make sense and are joined together in God’s orderly creation.