Purpose of evolution/scientists don't believe in creationism

The Rev. Charles Webb wrote, "the profound truth that the purpose of food is not merely to sustain individual life, but to make possible the procreation of other life." The Reverend is absolutely correct on this.Evolution and natural selection aren't about the survival of a member of a species per se, but the ability of that individual to pass on their genes to future descendants. An individual that starves and cannot survive and reproduce doesn't have the ability to give their DNA to future members of the species.
Indeed, evolution is often about cooperation. We can see that with other primates who live in groups (as do humans, as a rule) that have structure and a sense of rules. Indeed, these animals display a sense of primitive ethics (though unconscious) that allow them to survive (when they might perish if on their own) and pass on their closely-shared DNA.This type of natural selection that deals with cooperation indeed gave root to our moral sense. When we cooperate and are ethical to others, we are more likely to thrive as a society.

In response to the letter by Fred Fonda on there not being any intermediate forms between species simply isn't true. Homo habilis, homo erectus along with other species are intermediate forms between man and earlier primates.Protospinax and Paleospinaxar are ancestors to modern shark from primitive jawless fish. Paleoniscoids, Osteolepis, Panderichthys are transitional forms between bony fish to amphibians.
Dendrerpeton acadianum and Archegosaurus decheni are transitional forms among different amphibian species.I couldn't possibly list all intermediate/transitional forms that biology has found in the last 150 years in this letter.


In contrast to the view of Mr. Fonda, evolution isn't a statement that God doesn't exist, indeed the average believer in evolution believes in a deity. Even if a God does not exist, that doesn't mean, as Mr. Fonda believes, that man is without hope.Our purpose doesn't rely on an external force for us. Our purpose should be centered around making our fellow man and woman happy, to offer them respect as we would want to be respected.Indeed, those who are nonreligious aren't unhappy; most have fulfilled and good lives that are centered around family and friends. This effort, the strive toward equality and freedom for all here and throughout the world, is what gives me hope.


I was intrigued by the letter by Frank Bernabei. He stated he has met some creationist scientists and they state "evolution will be exposed as the biggest fraud ever perpetrated on mankind. They also informed me that more scientists are accepting a creator as the basis for everything that exists."Well, that might be news to the overwhelming majority of scientists in the field of biology, microbiology, biochemistry and paleontology who believe evolution is established as a fact (based on the evidence for it) and that how evolution operates is the underlying theory, just as plate tectonics is a fact and a theory at the same time.
Indeed, of those in the science fields who work in subjects related to evolution, you will rarely see many creationists. They are just a tiny handful of all scientists.Mr. Bernabei quotes Isaac Newton as a believer in a creator but, Mr. Newton lived more than one century before the time of Charles Darwin's thesis on Natural Selection and he lived almost three centuries before today and its overwhelming evidence for evolution.

Mr. Newton was a genius of his time, but an expert on modern biology and the evidence that deals with evolution, he wasn't. Nor were Martin Luther, Tyndale, Kant and Galileo, who he quotes. Indeed, some of those men aren't even scientists, none were biologists or studied in that field.Robert Bork and Billy Graham, who he also quotes, aren't scientists either. I would be shocked, indeed, if Billy Graham knew the difference between genetic drift and natural selection.
Einstein's statements on God were at best pantheist. Although evolution wasn't his field, Einstein never voiced any objections to evolution and was by no means a literal believer in the Torah or Genesis. Mr. Bernabei quotes a poll to show that about half of Americans don't believe in evolution. That is fine, because we don't base science on the opinions of polls. In 1400, if a poll was conducted, it would likely show that the vast majority of Europeans believed the earth was flat and a ship that sailed west would fall off the edge of the earth. Well, Mr. Columbus didn't believe in polls, of course.


Evolution is an accepted paradigm that underlies the creation of stronger antibiotics. A scientific theory isn't a guess, but something that is testable. Evolution meets that test.One test is the fact that fossils aren't scattered in the geological layers, but layered at the time that they lived and went extinct.I am curious, why is no one doubting the theories of relativity, quantum mechanics, plate tectonics, which are also, technically, scientific theories? Lastly, there is nothing mutually exclusive in belief in a God and being an evolutionist. In fact, of the Americans who believe in evolution, most are Christians or theists in fact. It seems Mr. Bernabei and people like him want individuals to believe in a limited conception of God.