Evolution vs. Creationism

Rick Perry, governor of the state of Texas, recently said that they teach evolution and creationism in Texas schools. Unless the Texas or US Justice Departments stopped enforcing the laws of the land, this is almost certainly not true, as the Supreme Court ruled in 1987 that teaching creationism in public schools is an unconstitutional violation of the Establishment Clause. A decision by the way that led to the birth of the intelligent design (ID) theory, which unlike creationism is not based on the biblical account of creation. According to its proponents 'the theory of intelligent design is an effort to empirically detect whether the 'apparent design' in nature observed by biologists is genuine design (the product of an organizing intelligence) or is simply the product of chance and mechanical natural laws". 

When I first learned about creationism and the desire of its disciples to have it taught in schools as an alternative to the theory of evolution, Darwinism for short, my reaction was why not? It certainly would not take more than 20 minutes to talk about creationism and how could that be wrong? It would certainly enforce the popular belief that in science there is always a battle of ideas in which over time the best idea wins. 

Creationism teaches that there is a God who created everything, although there is some debate about whether everything was created at once or whether God is still occasionally called into action to create some additional life forms to replace species that have gone extinct. This is not a poor attempt at humor; as discussed in Laura Snyder's recent book, whether God created everything at once or not was hotly debated in Darwin's time when the appearance of fossils from extinct species made one wonder about the nature of God's creation. The Intelligent Design theory, if we want to call it a theory, can neither be verified nor falsified. You have to believe it and in doing so you close the door to further scrutiny. What is true for ID is true for creationism as well. We will never be able to conclude with a reasonable measure of certainty that a particular natural fact must have required an intelligent designer since the answer to this question, as the question itself, is outside the realm of science.  

The ID theory is anti-scientific as it proclaims that there are aspects of our natural world outside of the realm of religion and metaphysics, that cannot be explained. For a scientist this is heresy, but one that lacks the power of enforcement bestowed upon it by the Inquisition. 

Within science there is no real debate about whether evolution is correct or not. The theory of evolution has been extremely helpful in explaining how species have developed over time. Not just helpful, also predictive. Predictions such as "if this extinct species is related to this living species, we can expect to find some intermediate species that has such and such characteristics" have been found correct on numerous occasions. Few biologists question whether the theory of evolution provides an accurate description of the development of species over time. While they may argue about specific parts of Darwinism, they do not look for alternative theories that would explain the facts better. And it is not because they are lazy. There is no good reason to look for such a theory, for the same reason that no one is looking for an alternative theory to explain gravity, notwithstanding the ongoing effort to develop a theory of 'everything' that would encompass all fundamental natural forces, including gravity. 

So, although it may seem that little harm would be done by allowing creationism or intelligent design to be taught in schools, it does not make sense to allow this to happen. As someone said the other day, it is like allowing an alternative math to be taught, one in which 2+2=6, in addition to the accepted math in which 2+2=4, and leaving it up to the kids to decide which one is true. Evolution vs. creationism or intelligent design is not a debate where scientists wonder which of these theories is more correct in describing the facts. Thanks to Darwin, and millions of scientists after him, we already know the answer to that question. 

It's time for Rick Perry to go back to school. Even in Texas.