Science and
Human Origins
A nn GAuGer
DOuGlASAxe
CASey luSkin
Seattle Discovery institute Press 2012
Description
Evidence for a purely Darwinian account of human origins is supposed to be
overwhelming. But is it? In this provocative book, three scientists challenge
the claim that undirected natural selection is capable of building a human
being, critically assess fossil and genetic evidence that human beings share a
common ancestor with apes, and debunk recent claims that the human race
could not have started from an original couple.
Copyright Notice
Copyright © 2012 by Discovery Institute and the respective authors. All
Rights Reserved.
Publisher’s Note
This book is part of a series published by the Center for Science & Culture
at Discovery Institute in Seattle. Previous books include The Deniable
Darwin by David Berlinski, In the Beginning and Other Essays on Intelligent
Designby Granville Sewell, Alfred Russel Wallace: A Rediscovered Life by
Michael Flannery, The Myth of Junk DNAby Jonathan Wells, and Signature
of Controversy, edited by David Klinghoffer.
Library Cataloging Data
Science and Human Origins by Ann Gauger, Douglas Axe, and Casey Luskin
Illustrations by Jonathan Aaron Jones and others as noted.
124 pages
Library of Congress Control Number: 2012934836
BISAC: SCI027000 SCIENCE / Life Sciences / Evolution
BISAC: SCI029000 SCIENCE / Life Sciences / Genetics & Genomics
ISBN-13: 978-1-936599-04-2 (paperback)
Publisher Information
Discovery Institute Press, 208 Columbia Street, Seattle, WA 98104
Internet: http://www.discoveryinstitutepress.com/
Published in the United States of America on acid-free paper.
First Edition, First Printing: April 2012.
Cover Design: Brian Gage
Interior Layout: Michael W. Perry
Contents
Introduction 7
1 Science and Human Origins
Ann Gauger 15
2 Darwin’s Little Engine That Couldn’t
Douglas Axe 31
3 Human Origins and the Fossil Record
Casey Luskin 45
4 Francis Collins, Junk DNA, and Chromosomal Fusion
Casey Luskin 85
5 The Science of Adam and Eve
Ann Gauger 105
Authors 123
Introduction
G
. K. Chesterton put it well in The Everlasting Man: “Man
is not merely an evolution but rather a revolution.”
1
Chesterton’s comment neatly captures the unease many people have
felt about Darwinian explanations of human origins right from the start.
Even Alfred Russel Wallace, co-founder with Darwin of the theory of
evolution by natural selection, eventually rejected a fully Darwinian explanation of human beings, preferring a form of intelligent design as an
alternative.
2
Since Darwin first proposed his theory of unguided evolution more
than a century-and-a-half ago, similar doubts have been expressed by a
parade of other scientists, philosophers, and public intellectuals.
Yet in recent years the public has been told—repeatedly—that the
case for a purely Darwinian account of human origins is now beyond
dispute. Indeed, hardly a month goes by without a new fossil fragment
or scientific study being touted as further incontestable proof that the
evidence for human evolution is well nigh overwhelming.
But is the evidence for a Darwinian account of human origins really
so persuasive?
In this book, three scientists tackle that question. Their findings
may surprise you. Ann Gauger is a developmental and molecular biologist with research experience at MIT, the University of Washington,
and Harvard University. Douglas Axe is a molecular biologist who has
held research scientist positions at Cambridge University, the Cambridge Medical Research Council Centre, and the Babraham Institute
in Cambridge. Casey Luskin holds a graduate degree in earth sciences
from the University of California at San Diego and has conducted geo-
8/ Science and Human Origins /
logical research at the Scripps Institute for Oceanography. All three
have published work in peer-reviewed science journals. All three have
done “bench” science, not just science writing.
And all three think Darwin’s theory is inadequate to account for
both human origins and human uniqueness.
Before going on, it might be helpful to define what is being talked
about when this book refers to “Darwinian” evolution. In public discussions today, evolution is a slippery term that can mean anything from
generic change over time (an idea no one disputes) to an undirected historical process of “survival of the fittest” leading from one-celled organisms to man.
Strictly speaking, modern Darwinian theory (often called “neoDarwinism”) has two key planks: common descentand natural selection acting on unplanned genetic variations.
Common descentis the idea that all animals now living have descended from one or a few original ancestors through a process Darwin
called “descent with modification.” According to this idea, not only humans and apes share an ancestor, but so do humans, clams, and fungi.
Natural selectionis the idea of “survival of the fittest.” Modern
Darwinian theory combines natural selection with the insights of modern genetics: Randomly occurring mutations and recombinations in
genes produce unplanned variations among individual organisms in a
population. Some of these variations will help organisms survive and
reproduce more effectively. Over time, these beneficial variations will
come to dominate a population of organisms, and over even more time,
these beneficial variations will accumulate, resulting in entirely new biological features and organisms.
As Darwin himself made clear, natural selection is an unintelligent
process that is blind to the future. It cannot select new features based on
some future goal or potential benefit. As a result, evolution in a Darwinian sense is “the result of an unguided, unplanned process,” to cite the
words of 38 Nobel laureates who issued a statement defending Darwin’s
theory in 2005.
3
Introduction / 9
In the Darwinian view, amazing biological features such as the vertebrate eye, or the wings of butterflies, or the blood-clotting system, are
in no way the purposeful result of evolution. Rather, they are the unintended byproducts of the interplay of chance (random genetic mutations
and recombinations) and necessity (natural selection). The same holds
true for higher animals such as human beings. In the words of late Harvard paleontologist George Gaylord Simpson: “Man is the result of a
purposeless and natural process that did not have him in mind.”
4
This book is focused on the scientificarguments about human evolution. But it should be obvious there is a larger cultural context to the
debate.
Many secular Darwinians employ Darwin’s theory as a battering
ram to topple the idea of human exceptionalism. According to late Harvard paleontologist Stephen Jay Gould, Darwinian “biology took away
our status as paragons created in the image of God.”
5
Indeed, in the Darwinian view human beings are but “a fortuitous cosmic afterthought.”
6
Princeton University bioethicist Peter Singer expresses a similar view.
A champion of infanticide for handicapped human newborns, Singer
makes clear that Darwinism supplies the foundation for his debased
view of human beings: “All we are doing is catching up with Darwin.
He showed in the 19th century that we are simply animals. Humans
had imagined we were a separate part of Creation, that there was some
magical line between Us and Them. Darwin’s theory undermined the
foundations of that entire Western way of thinking about the place of
our species in the universe.”
7
Darwin is likewise a patron saint for many
radical environmentalists. In the approving words of former Earth First!
activist Christopher Manes, “Darwin invited humanity to face the fact
that the observation of nature has revealed not one scrap of evidence that
humankind is superior or special, or even particularly more interesting
than, say, lichen.”
8
Many religious Darwinists, meanwhile, use Darwinian science to
urge revisions in traditional Christian teachings about both God and
man. Karl Giberson, a co-founder of the pro-theistic-evolution BioLo-
10/ Science and Human Origins /
gos Foundation, argues that human beings were evil from the start
because evolution is driven by selfishness; therefore, Christians must
abandon the idea that human beings were originally created by God
morally good.9
Current BioLogos president Darrel Falk urges Christians to scrap their outdated belief in Adam and Eve as parents of the
human race, claiming that evolutionary biology now proves “there was
never a time when there was a single first couple, two people who were
the progenitors of the entire human race.”
10
And geneticist Francis Collins, the original inspiration for BioLogos, puts forward a watered-down
view of God’s sovereignty over the natural world. In one part of his book
The Language of God, Collins claims (wrongly) that the human genome
is riddled with functionless “ junk DNA,” which he claims is evidence
against the idea that human beings were specifically designed by God.
11
Elsewhere in his book, Collins states that God “could” have known and
specified the outcomes of evolution; but in that case, Collins believes
that God made evolution looklike “a random and undirected process,”
turning God into a cosmic trickster who creates the world by a process
meant to mislead us.12
Biologist Kenneth Miller, author of Finding Darwin’s God, goes
considerably further. Miller explicitly argues that God neither knows
nor directs the specific outcomes of evolution—including human beings.
In Miller’s view, “mankind’s appearance on this planet was notpreordained… we are here not as the products of an inevitable procession of
evolutionary success, but as an afterthought, a minor detail, a happenstance in a history that might just as well have left us out.”
13
According to Miller, God did know that undirected evolution would produce
some sort of rational creature eventually, but the creature produced by
evolution might have been a “a big-brained dinosaur” or “a mollusk with
exceptional mental capabilities” rather than a human being.
14
Whether secular or religious, these champions of modern Darwinian theory all share the same underlying assumption: In their view,
science has proven Darwinian evolution beyond a shadow of a doubt;
Introduction / 11
therefore our understanding of human beings and the rest of life must
be radically reshaped according to Darwinian tenets.
But what if this assumption turns out to be wrong? What if the
unbounded faith placed in Darwinian theory—especially as applied to
human beings—is scientifically unwarranted?
The authors of this volume invite you to consider that possibility.
• In chapters 1 and 2, Ann Gauger and Douglas Axe challenge
the central claim that Darwin’s undirected mechanism of natural selection is really capable of building a human being.
• In chapters 1, 3, and 4, Ann Gauger and Casey Luskin critically
assess the genetic and fossil evidence that human beings share a
common ancestor with apes.
• And in the final chapter, Ann Gauger refutes scientific claims
that the human race could not have started from an original
couple.
Although much of this book focuses on the shortcomings of Darwinian theory, the scientists represented here are not merely critics of
the existing paradigm. Instead, they share a positive vision that much
of biology would make better sense from the perspective of intelligent
design rather than unguided Darwinian evolution. Often mischaracterized (and wrongly conflated with creationism), intelligent design is simply the effort to investigate empirically whether the exquisitely coordinated features we find throughout nature are the result of an intelligent
cause rather than a blind and undirected process like natural selection.
15
Because intelligent design focuses on whether the development of
life was purposeful or blind, it directly challenges the second plank of
Darwinian theory (unguided natural selection) rather than the first
(common descent). Nevertheless, intelligent design scientists remain
free to critically assess the actual evidence for common descent, as they
do here.
12/ Science and Human Origins /
Whether you consider yourself secular, religious, or something in
between, the science of human origins raises deep and continuing questions about what it means to be human. You are invited to explore some
of these questions in the pages that follow.
John G. West, Ph.D.
Associate Director, Center for Science and Culture
Discovery Institute, Seattle
Endnotes
1. G. K. Chesterton, The Everlasting Man(San Francisco: Ignatius Press, 1993),
26.
2. See Michael Flannery, Alfred Russel Wallace: A Rediscovered Life(Seattle:
Discovery Institute Press, 2011).
3. Letter from Nobel Laureates to Kansas State Board of Education, Sept. 9,
2005. The letter was sent out under the auspices of the Elie Wiesel Foundation.
A copy or the letter was posted at http://media.ljworld.com/pdf/2005/09/15/
nobel_letter.pdf (accessed Aug. 8, 2006).
4. George Gaylord Simpson, The Meaning of Evolution: A Study of the History of
Life and of Its Significance for Man, revised edition (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1967), 345.
5. Stephen J. Gould, Ever Since Darwin: Reflections in Natural History(New
York: W. W. Norton and Company, 1977), 147.
6. Stephen J. Gould, Dinosaur in a Haystack: Reflections in Natural History(New
York: Harmony Books, 1995), 327.
7. Quoted in Johann Hari, “Peter Singer: Some people are more equal than
others,” The Independent,July 1, 2004, http://www.independent.co.uk/
news/people/profiles/peter-singer-some-people-are-more-equal-than-others-6166342.html (accessed on March 6, 2012).
8. Christopher Manes, Green Rage: Radical Environmentalism and the Unmaking
of Civilization(Boston: Little, Brown, and Company, 1990), 142.
9. Karl Giberson, Saving Darwin: How to Be a Christian and Believe in Evolution
(New York: HarperOne, 2008), 11–13. The book has a Foreword by Francis
Collins. For a discussion of Giberson’s view, see John G. West, “Nothing New
Under the Sun” in Jay Richards, God and Evolution: Protestants, Catholics, and
Jews Explore Darwin’s Challenge to Faith(Seattle: Discovery Institute Press,
2010), 33–52.
10. Darrel Falk, “BioLogos and the June 2011 ‘Christianity Today’ Editorial,”
June 6, 2011, http://biologos.org/blog/biologos-and-the-june-2011-christianity-today-editorial (accessed March 6, 2012).
Introduction / 13
11. Francis S. Collins, The Language of God: A Scientist Presents Evidence for Belief
(New York: Free Press, 2006), 135–136. For a rebuttal of some of Collins’s
scientific arguments, see chapter four of this book by Casey Luskin. Also
see Jonathan Wells, “Darwin of the Gaps,” in Richards, God and Evolution,
117–128.
12. Collins, The Language of God, 205–206.
13. Kenneth R. Miller, Finding Darwin’s God: A Scientist’s Search for Common
Ground Between God and Evolution(New York: HarperCollins, 1999), 272.
14. Miller, quoted in John G. West, Darwin Day in America: How Our Politics
and Culture Have Been Dehumanized in the Name of Science(Wilmington,
DE: ISI Books, 2007), 226.
15. For good introductions to intelligent design, see Guillermo Gonzalez and Jay
Richards, The Privileged Planet: How Our Place in the Cosmos is Designed for
Discovery(Washington DC: Regnery, 2004); Stephen C. Meyer, Signature in
the Cell: DNA and the Evidence for Intelligent Design(New York: HarperOne,
2009), and William Dembski and Jonathan Wells, The Design of Life(Dallas:
Foundation for Thought and Ethics, 2008).
Human Origins
A nn GAuGer
DOuGlASAxe
CASey luSkin
Seattle Discovery institute Press 2012
Description
Evidence for a purely Darwinian account of human origins is supposed to be
overwhelming. But is it? In this provocative book, three scientists challenge
the claim that undirected natural selection is capable of building a human
being, critically assess fossil and genetic evidence that human beings share a
common ancestor with apes, and debunk recent claims that the human race
could not have started from an original couple.
Copyright Notice
Copyright © 2012 by Discovery Institute and the respective authors. All
Rights Reserved.
Publisher’s Note
This book is part of a series published by the Center for Science & Culture
at Discovery Institute in Seattle. Previous books include The Deniable
Darwin by David Berlinski, In the Beginning and Other Essays on Intelligent
Designby Granville Sewell, Alfred Russel Wallace: A Rediscovered Life by
Michael Flannery, The Myth of Junk DNAby Jonathan Wells, and Signature
of Controversy, edited by David Klinghoffer.
Library Cataloging Data
Science and Human Origins by Ann Gauger, Douglas Axe, and Casey Luskin
Illustrations by Jonathan Aaron Jones and others as noted.
124 pages
Library of Congress Control Number: 2012934836
BISAC: SCI027000 SCIENCE / Life Sciences / Evolution
BISAC: SCI029000 SCIENCE / Life Sciences / Genetics & Genomics
ISBN-13: 978-1-936599-04-2 (paperback)
Publisher Information
Discovery Institute Press, 208 Columbia Street, Seattle, WA 98104
Internet: http://www.discoveryinstitutepress.com/
Published in the United States of America on acid-free paper.
First Edition, First Printing: April 2012.
Cover Design: Brian Gage
Interior Layout: Michael W. Perry
Contents
Introduction 7
1 Science and Human Origins
Ann Gauger 15
2 Darwin’s Little Engine That Couldn’t
Douglas Axe 31
3 Human Origins and the Fossil Record
Casey Luskin 45
4 Francis Collins, Junk DNA, and Chromosomal Fusion
Casey Luskin 85
5 The Science of Adam and Eve
Ann Gauger 105
Authors 123
Introduction
G
. K. Chesterton put it well in The Everlasting Man: “Man
is not merely an evolution but rather a revolution.”
1
Chesterton’s comment neatly captures the unease many people have
felt about Darwinian explanations of human origins right from the start.
Even Alfred Russel Wallace, co-founder with Darwin of the theory of
evolution by natural selection, eventually rejected a fully Darwinian explanation of human beings, preferring a form of intelligent design as an
alternative.
2
Since Darwin first proposed his theory of unguided evolution more
than a century-and-a-half ago, similar doubts have been expressed by a
parade of other scientists, philosophers, and public intellectuals.
Yet in recent years the public has been told—repeatedly—that the
case for a purely Darwinian account of human origins is now beyond
dispute. Indeed, hardly a month goes by without a new fossil fragment
or scientific study being touted as further incontestable proof that the
evidence for human evolution is well nigh overwhelming.
But is the evidence for a Darwinian account of human origins really
so persuasive?
In this book, three scientists tackle that question. Their findings
may surprise you. Ann Gauger is a developmental and molecular biologist with research experience at MIT, the University of Washington,
and Harvard University. Douglas Axe is a molecular biologist who has
held research scientist positions at Cambridge University, the Cambridge Medical Research Council Centre, and the Babraham Institute
in Cambridge. Casey Luskin holds a graduate degree in earth sciences
from the University of California at San Diego and has conducted geo-
8/ Science and Human Origins /
logical research at the Scripps Institute for Oceanography. All three
have published work in peer-reviewed science journals. All three have
done “bench” science, not just science writing.
And all three think Darwin’s theory is inadequate to account for
both human origins and human uniqueness.
Before going on, it might be helpful to define what is being talked
about when this book refers to “Darwinian” evolution. In public discussions today, evolution is a slippery term that can mean anything from
generic change over time (an idea no one disputes) to an undirected historical process of “survival of the fittest” leading from one-celled organisms to man.
Strictly speaking, modern Darwinian theory (often called “neoDarwinism”) has two key planks: common descentand natural selection acting on unplanned genetic variations.
Common descentis the idea that all animals now living have descended from one or a few original ancestors through a process Darwin
called “descent with modification.” According to this idea, not only humans and apes share an ancestor, but so do humans, clams, and fungi.
Natural selectionis the idea of “survival of the fittest.” Modern
Darwinian theory combines natural selection with the insights of modern genetics: Randomly occurring mutations and recombinations in
genes produce unplanned variations among individual organisms in a
population. Some of these variations will help organisms survive and
reproduce more effectively. Over time, these beneficial variations will
come to dominate a population of organisms, and over even more time,
these beneficial variations will accumulate, resulting in entirely new biological features and organisms.
As Darwin himself made clear, natural selection is an unintelligent
process that is blind to the future. It cannot select new features based on
some future goal or potential benefit. As a result, evolution in a Darwinian sense is “the result of an unguided, unplanned process,” to cite the
words of 38 Nobel laureates who issued a statement defending Darwin’s
theory in 2005.
3
Introduction / 9
In the Darwinian view, amazing biological features such as the vertebrate eye, or the wings of butterflies, or the blood-clotting system, are
in no way the purposeful result of evolution. Rather, they are the unintended byproducts of the interplay of chance (random genetic mutations
and recombinations) and necessity (natural selection). The same holds
true for higher animals such as human beings. In the words of late Harvard paleontologist George Gaylord Simpson: “Man is the result of a
purposeless and natural process that did not have him in mind.”
4
This book is focused on the scientificarguments about human evolution. But it should be obvious there is a larger cultural context to the
debate.
Many secular Darwinians employ Darwin’s theory as a battering
ram to topple the idea of human exceptionalism. According to late Harvard paleontologist Stephen Jay Gould, Darwinian “biology took away
our status as paragons created in the image of God.”
5
Indeed, in the Darwinian view human beings are but “a fortuitous cosmic afterthought.”
6
Princeton University bioethicist Peter Singer expresses a similar view.
A champion of infanticide for handicapped human newborns, Singer
makes clear that Darwinism supplies the foundation for his debased
view of human beings: “All we are doing is catching up with Darwin.
He showed in the 19th century that we are simply animals. Humans
had imagined we were a separate part of Creation, that there was some
magical line between Us and Them. Darwin’s theory undermined the
foundations of that entire Western way of thinking about the place of
our species in the universe.”
7
Darwin is likewise a patron saint for many
radical environmentalists. In the approving words of former Earth First!
activist Christopher Manes, “Darwin invited humanity to face the fact
that the observation of nature has revealed not one scrap of evidence that
humankind is superior or special, or even particularly more interesting
than, say, lichen.”
8
Many religious Darwinists, meanwhile, use Darwinian science to
urge revisions in traditional Christian teachings about both God and
man. Karl Giberson, a co-founder of the pro-theistic-evolution BioLo-
10/ Science and Human Origins /
gos Foundation, argues that human beings were evil from the start
because evolution is driven by selfishness; therefore, Christians must
abandon the idea that human beings were originally created by God
morally good.9
Current BioLogos president Darrel Falk urges Christians to scrap their outdated belief in Adam and Eve as parents of the
human race, claiming that evolutionary biology now proves “there was
never a time when there was a single first couple, two people who were
the progenitors of the entire human race.”
10
And geneticist Francis Collins, the original inspiration for BioLogos, puts forward a watered-down
view of God’s sovereignty over the natural world. In one part of his book
The Language of God, Collins claims (wrongly) that the human genome
is riddled with functionless “ junk DNA,” which he claims is evidence
against the idea that human beings were specifically designed by God.
11
Elsewhere in his book, Collins states that God “could” have known and
specified the outcomes of evolution; but in that case, Collins believes
that God made evolution looklike “a random and undirected process,”
turning God into a cosmic trickster who creates the world by a process
meant to mislead us.12
Biologist Kenneth Miller, author of Finding Darwin’s God, goes
considerably further. Miller explicitly argues that God neither knows
nor directs the specific outcomes of evolution—including human beings.
In Miller’s view, “mankind’s appearance on this planet was notpreordained… we are here not as the products of an inevitable procession of
evolutionary success, but as an afterthought, a minor detail, a happenstance in a history that might just as well have left us out.”
13
According to Miller, God did know that undirected evolution would produce
some sort of rational creature eventually, but the creature produced by
evolution might have been a “a big-brained dinosaur” or “a mollusk with
exceptional mental capabilities” rather than a human being.
14
Whether secular or religious, these champions of modern Darwinian theory all share the same underlying assumption: In their view,
science has proven Darwinian evolution beyond a shadow of a doubt;
Introduction / 11
therefore our understanding of human beings and the rest of life must
be radically reshaped according to Darwinian tenets.
But what if this assumption turns out to be wrong? What if the
unbounded faith placed in Darwinian theory—especially as applied to
human beings—is scientifically unwarranted?
The authors of this volume invite you to consider that possibility.
• In chapters 1 and 2, Ann Gauger and Douglas Axe challenge
the central claim that Darwin’s undirected mechanism of natural selection is really capable of building a human being.
• In chapters 1, 3, and 4, Ann Gauger and Casey Luskin critically
assess the genetic and fossil evidence that human beings share a
common ancestor with apes.
• And in the final chapter, Ann Gauger refutes scientific claims
that the human race could not have started from an original
couple.
Although much of this book focuses on the shortcomings of Darwinian theory, the scientists represented here are not merely critics of
the existing paradigm. Instead, they share a positive vision that much
of biology would make better sense from the perspective of intelligent
design rather than unguided Darwinian evolution. Often mischaracterized (and wrongly conflated with creationism), intelligent design is simply the effort to investigate empirically whether the exquisitely coordinated features we find throughout nature are the result of an intelligent
cause rather than a blind and undirected process like natural selection.
15
Because intelligent design focuses on whether the development of
life was purposeful or blind, it directly challenges the second plank of
Darwinian theory (unguided natural selection) rather than the first
(common descent). Nevertheless, intelligent design scientists remain
free to critically assess the actual evidence for common descent, as they
do here.
12/ Science and Human Origins /
Whether you consider yourself secular, religious, or something in
between, the science of human origins raises deep and continuing questions about what it means to be human. You are invited to explore some
of these questions in the pages that follow.
John G. West, Ph.D.
Associate Director, Center for Science and Culture
Discovery Institute, Seattle
Endnotes
1. G. K. Chesterton, The Everlasting Man(San Francisco: Ignatius Press, 1993),
26.
2. See Michael Flannery, Alfred Russel Wallace: A Rediscovered Life(Seattle:
Discovery Institute Press, 2011).
3. Letter from Nobel Laureates to Kansas State Board of Education, Sept. 9,
2005. The letter was sent out under the auspices of the Elie Wiesel Foundation.
A copy or the letter was posted at http://media.ljworld.com/pdf/2005/09/15/
nobel_letter.pdf (accessed Aug. 8, 2006).
4. George Gaylord Simpson, The Meaning of Evolution: A Study of the History of
Life and of Its Significance for Man, revised edition (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1967), 345.
5. Stephen J. Gould, Ever Since Darwin: Reflections in Natural History(New
York: W. W. Norton and Company, 1977), 147.
6. Stephen J. Gould, Dinosaur in a Haystack: Reflections in Natural History(New
York: Harmony Books, 1995), 327.
7. Quoted in Johann Hari, “Peter Singer: Some people are more equal than
others,” The Independent,July 1, 2004, http://www.independent.co.uk/
news/people/profiles/peter-singer-some-people-are-more-equal-than-others-6166342.html (accessed on March 6, 2012).
8. Christopher Manes, Green Rage: Radical Environmentalism and the Unmaking
of Civilization(Boston: Little, Brown, and Company, 1990), 142.
9. Karl Giberson, Saving Darwin: How to Be a Christian and Believe in Evolution
(New York: HarperOne, 2008), 11–13. The book has a Foreword by Francis
Collins. For a discussion of Giberson’s view, see John G. West, “Nothing New
Under the Sun” in Jay Richards, God and Evolution: Protestants, Catholics, and
Jews Explore Darwin’s Challenge to Faith(Seattle: Discovery Institute Press,
2010), 33–52.
10. Darrel Falk, “BioLogos and the June 2011 ‘Christianity Today’ Editorial,”
June 6, 2011, http://biologos.org/blog/biologos-and-the-june-2011-christianity-today-editorial (accessed March 6, 2012).
Introduction / 13
11. Francis S. Collins, The Language of God: A Scientist Presents Evidence for Belief
(New York: Free Press, 2006), 135–136. For a rebuttal of some of Collins’s
scientific arguments, see chapter four of this book by Casey Luskin. Also
see Jonathan Wells, “Darwin of the Gaps,” in Richards, God and Evolution,
117–128.
12. Collins, The Language of God, 205–206.
13. Kenneth R. Miller, Finding Darwin’s God: A Scientist’s Search for Common
Ground Between God and Evolution(New York: HarperCollins, 1999), 272.
14. Miller, quoted in John G. West, Darwin Day in America: How Our Politics
and Culture Have Been Dehumanized in the Name of Science(Wilmington,
DE: ISI Books, 2007), 226.
15. For good introductions to intelligent design, see Guillermo Gonzalez and Jay
Richards, The Privileged Planet: How Our Place in the Cosmos is Designed for
Discovery(Washington DC: Regnery, 2004); Stephen C. Meyer, Signature in
the Cell: DNA and the Evidence for Intelligent Design(New York: HarperOne,
2009), and William Dembski and Jonathan Wells, The Design of Life(Dallas:
Foundation for Thought and Ethics, 2008).
No comments:
Post a Comment