The Religion of Evolution

Dear Mr. Smith: I read your "about me" column. If you want people to take you more seriously, the paragraph "about me" is an opportunity to impress your reader with your qualifications to write on this highly techinical topic. People may want to know what makes you particularly qualified to address the subject.

You are of course right, though I'm not sure if you're referring to the introduction on my book, or to my Mr.Smith page on authonomy.

The introduction explains briefly that I am attacking this subject as a reasoning Layman. Retired at 46, I was a program manager for a large automotive Tool and Die shop in Canada, and my wife and I have simplified our lives and are now living in a central american country.
Qualifications:
As a scientist, none. As a Layman, more than most.
I have read thousands of articles on evolution or articles that included the ideas around it, am an avid National Geographic reader and have been for decades, read technical manuals for fun, have studied the bible in depth for 35 years; read, cross-referenced and analyzed the Koran in some depth, read parts of the Sikh holy book of proverbs, analyzed the book of Mormon somewhat...and the list goes on.

I read everything with an open mind and in the perspective in which it was written. Once I come to a conclusion though, I am not afraid to say it. If it seems like evolution is in some way being attacked here, it is simply because the vengeance to which many knowledgeable people adhere to this faith contradicts the very principles they claim to follow, that of hypothesis, impartial observation and confirmation or disproof of facts. I purposely abstained from drowning the reader in deep technical details, basing my arguments instead on reason.
All in all, the reader should at all times keep in mind that this is my opinion only, and that I respect people's decision to believe whatever they want to believe.

Very interesting and you've clearly thought hard and long about this.
I agree with you in part. There are many , many gaps in our knowledge and understanding and as you say, there are major pitfalls in the evolutionary theory. Half an eye isn't much use and neither is a half formed lung. At that stage it wouldn't be an advantage, so in terms of "natural selection" or survival of the fittest, it wouldn't be passed on anymore than the non-mutant variety. And it might be a disadvantage, so never survive to be passed on.
But Charles Darwin DID acknowledge these problems . He raised them in his book The Origin of the Species, 150 years ago. He didn't claim to have all the answers. He was starting the debate. Some people (well, a lot of people) misunderstood what he was saying. Hence all those cartoons of Darwin as a monkey etc. Even when I was a teenager in the seventies, my great auntie (a very religious person) declared that she didn't believe in evolution because she wasn't from a monkey. Yet Darwin was a stauncn Christian. He didn't find his theory of natural selection etc conflicted with his religion.
I feel it is a highly complex subject on which even the experts know very little and yet because people tend to get upset about it, many of us stop listening and thinking and seek the protection of views which seem safest. Personaly, I welcome the idea of having Neanderhal genes. They seemed a lot more peaceful than homo sapeins and this could explain why they became extinct. Perhaps it also explains why some of us find it so difficult to be part of the consumer, fast track, fast change society? Perhaps by coincidence of our parents' pairing, we've got more Neanderhal ancestory than average and show more of their traits? It's thought they didn't travel as the homo sapiens, that they accepted things and did not change their environment so much. Is that why I walk round an obstacle in my way, rather than remove the obstacle as my husband would do? But it is known by evidence found in fossils etc, they did have skills in carving odjects and art. They did have feelings for their group and grieve over the dead. They could mate and produce children with modern man, so they mustn't have been that much different.
As for the human race degenerating...yes, that's true but it is at least partly because modern man has interfered with the human body and so that not only the fittest survive. I shouldn't be alive, I was born 2 months prematurely and should have died.. I seemed all right as a child and growing up, but I have had health problems since my twenties which are severe now,. Have I passed anything of these onto my 19 year old daughter? I don't know yet. There are millions of similar examples around the developed world. Very few of us would be alive without the help of medical science. (think appendicitis, infections, diabetes and child birth, just for starters.) So yes, on average we are probably less healthy and weaker than are ancestors werea few generations ago but I don't think this this is indicates natural selection is a defective theory, it just shows how much we have interfered with it.
These are just my ideas, after reading and thinking about your first chapter. You write clearly and bring in many concepts from a range of disciplines. I'd have liked to have heard more about Charles Dawin and his trip on the HMS Beagle, but maybe he'll come into it later? (Living very near Shrewsbury, his town of birth, I am biased towards him.)
Like Darwin I don't feel Evolution is necessarily in conflict with the idea of god..because who or what started the BIG BANG? Perhaps everything is too complex to have developed by coincidence? As you say, what are the odds of it ? I think we need to keep open minds and listen to all the arguments and new discoveries. This book reminds us to do that. Thank you for challenging my ideas and making me think. Let me know when you upload more chapters.
Cherry G,
The Girl From Ithaca

I agree that the whole Evolution, natural selection process thing is a faith just as Christianity is.

Have you thought of adding a section on Darwin and the history of these theories. A brief outline of the development of this new idea from its early days into the fundamentalist faith of so many today could be interesting. Alan "The Right Yoke"

My next chapter will focus on the creation account and leave readers with the impression that it can be believed by the reasoning layman.

I have been aginst the evolution brain wash for about 30 years. So I had to read your work. I agree with the subject matter. I know that you describe the work as a laymans work. Yet you come accross as sermon notes at times. Lots of data and definitions. In the end you conclude that either evolution or creationism is a matter of faith because there is no solid evidence.

Should have a good market in the Christian genre.

Backed.

I have been aginst the evolution brain wash for about 30 years. So I had to read your work. I agree with the subject matter. I know that you describe the work as a laymans work. Yet you come accross as sermon notes at times. Lots of data and definitions. In the end you conclude that either evolution or creationism is a matter of faith because there is no solid evidence.

Should have a good market in the Christian genre.

Backed.

I have never provided negative feedback to an author on this website, but I am about to, but hopefully it will be received as constructive in nature.

First of all, let me say that I grew up in a family that understood the world exclusively in terms of Genesis One, and strongly opposed evolutionary theory. Since I did not major in the sciences I have spent most of my adult life mindlessly embracing the beliefs that I was reared in. However, in the past few years I have been giving study to the sciences, and I can tell you that it you start actually studying the science--that which is observed by way of the human senses--it is very difficult to dismiss evolutionary theory.

If you intend to do a credible book, you are going to have to not just provide the ready with some nice philosophical treatise, but you are going to have to actually dig into the science, and demonstrate where and why it is wrong. The fact is that change does occur through mutation and natural selection. The evidence for this is overwhelming, and the examples are very evident if you actually give careful study to it. If you want to know why certain animals are the color they are or have any number of other characteristics that serve as a survival mechanism, natural selection can provide a very compelling answer. Over time, I have come to conclude that this change can be quite significant. Because of the rapid life cycle of bacteria, for example, we can see this change on a human time scale such that it becomes drug resistant.

We all possess a unique code in the form of DNA. It is a code that actually contains our history, and can identify to some degree who our ancestors were and where they came from. Now that science has mapped the human genome and a number of other biological genomes, the next step will be to make DNA connections between species.

The bottom line is, we may have a preference of belief, and it may be something other than evolution. However, I do believe that there is wisdom in avoiding arrogance on the subject, and to proceed in humility.

Now a few thoughts regarding the impact of evolution on theism.

1. The fact that we would eventuate from the big bang cosmology, suggests the possibility of a designer. From the human perspective, it is difficult to conceive of the universe to have turned out as it did outside of intelligent guidance.

2. The digital code that makes up DNA, represents information that contains specified complexity. This is significant because humans always associate such complexity with design. The words on this page are an example of specified complexity because they convey meaning. DNA conveys such meaning. Statistically speaking, it seems that there is not enough time in the history of the universe for the information to have assembled outside of a design hypothesis.

3. Biologists have historically used the reductionistic approach to learn and understand the workings of biology--the idea being the by reducing study to its smallest possible unit, the explanation for how it evolved would be forthcoming. The leading theoretical edge of the science now recognizes that reductionism alone is inadequate for such explanations. Reductionism, for example can not explain the emerge of the heart, or other bodily organs. Again, a design hypothesis can be helpful here.

4. Finally, what are Christians to make of evolution in the face of a supposedly loving God? Some propose theistic evolution. However, I do not believe that a God of love can be any part of a system that has predatory qualities, where survival of the fittest is the ruling principle. It runs completely counter to the Biblical understanding of God. The solution to some this may be in our understanding of a secondary force--demonic--that Scriptures suggests to be ruling the world. We understand self centeredness to be a part of the "sin" issue, and evolution points to a cosmic power that is outside of a loving God.

I would recommend reading widely on this subject. You are going to need to read by creationist perspectives as well as evolutionary perspectives. You should also spend a great deal of time understanding the science of evolution. If you are to have a book of merit, it will be necessary to address a lot of very compelling evidence. Good Luck

Dear Mr. Smith
What incredible logic! Have we lost forever our genetic pool? I like the way you say man should spread his seed. Yes, I can understand it all from an evolutionary perspective. What would we be if we had taken evolution more seriously than religeon? And why can both mesh?

You have me thinking. Great book and you write extremey well

A pleasure to back
The Lor d of the Dawn
Yasmin Esack

The Religion of Evolution

Mr. Smith

An interesting subject taken together - enlightening and stimulating to read as a layperson. I am not qualified to comment on much of this, but see it as an opportunity perhaps for self-examination and maybe self-exploration - how do I feel about the subject matter? You write with an air of authority which indicates that you have done much research and that you know your material well. Perhaps the day will come when science and religion will agree? I see that happening in some distant future - the details of and authority for which I am unable to provide but, call it hunch. I commend your effort here and had no problem backing this. Best wishes in getting it published Mr. Smith.
Zan

Dear Mr. Smith: I read your "about me" column. If you want people to take you more seriously, the paragraph "about me" is an opportunity to impress your reader with your qualifications to write on this highly techinical topic. People may want to know what makes you particularly qualified to address the subject.

You are of course right, though I'm not sure if you're referring to the introduction on my book, or to my Mr.Smith page on authonomy.

The introduction explains briefly that I am attacking this subject as a reasoning Layman. Retired at 46, I was a program manager for a large automotive Tool and Die shop in Canada, and my wife and I have simplified our lives and are now living in a central american country.
Qualifications:
As a scientist, none. As a Layman, more than most.
I have read thousands of articles on evolution or articles that included the ideas around it, am an avid National Geographic reader and have been for decades, read technical manuals for fun, have studied the bible in depth for 35 years; read, cross-referenced and analyzed the Koran in some depth, read parts of the Sikh holy book of proverbs, analyzed the book of Mormon somewhat...and the list goes on.

I read everything with an open mind and in the perspective in which it was written. Once I come to a conclusion though, I am not afraid to say it. If it seems like evolution is in some way being attacked here, it is simply because the vengeance to which many knowledgeable people adhere to this faith contradicts the very principles they claim to follow, that of hypothesis, impartial observation and confirmation or disproof of facts. I purposely abstained from drowning the reader in deep technical details, basing my arguments instead on reason.
All in all, the reader should at all times keep in mind that this is my opinion only, and that I respect people's decision to believe whatever they want to believe.

Dear Mr. Smith: I read your "about me" column. If you want people to take you more seriously, the paragraph "about me" is an opportunity to impress your reader with your qualifications to write on this highly techinical topic. People may want to know what makes you particularly qualified to address the subject.

I think you should add more. I'm keen to read. I imagine you will deal with some very controversial stuff.
Carl
The time hunters

Look at it like this: If your story survives to the top 30, 40 titles, you are a survivor. If enough people like this kind of story, a genre may emerge. A new creature. Or a new creation. If nobody puts the story on their shelf, the story will sink into oblivion. That's evolution in a nutshell.

Good luck with your writing. Methinks thou protesteth too much.

Welcome aboard, Mr. Smith. This website will improve your writing craft, if you allow it. I'm a bit of a pitch doctor, having read thousands of pitches in my time on this website, so I want to share my insight here with you. You have to think of your pitches as your sales tool to grab the casual reader's eyes. The short pitch is brilliant. For the long pitch, give us more detail. Perfecting your pitches is how you climb in ranking to gather more exposure and comments to better your novel. The writing is good so I am SHELVING you.

Though I have been a very active member for over a year and have the most commented book, I can still use your comments on my book when you get the chance. Every little bit helps. Cheers!

JC
The Obergemau Key

Dear Mr. Smith, I love all of your research - I still believe Genesis 1 - each of the 6 days of creation, the evening & morning were each day - the sun went up & went down to make each day. :) Before I began to read your book, I was prepared by your recap/pitch,which was very well done. :) Your story is good because you create interest by having short paragraphs & lots of dialogue, which makes me want to keep reading to find out what's going to happen next. I'm "backing" your book: When you back a book, it only improves the ranking of that book, not yours. However, the author whose book you are backing may decide to back your book also, in which case yes, your ranking would be improved...authonomy. :) Please "back" my TWO memoir books, "He Loves Me, He Loves Me Not" & my completed memoir unedited version? "Tell Me True Love Stories," which tells at the end, my illness now & 6th abusive marriage." Thanks, Susie :)
p.s. Remember: Every time you place a book on your bookshelf, your recommendation pushes the book up the rankings. And while that book sits on your bookshelf, your reputation as a talent spotter increases depending on how well that book performs. :)

Great writing, can't really comment about the content as my faith has dwindled recently. But it was nicley written, clean and clear content.

Good luck with it
Melxx
Impeding Justice