Essay About Are Biology Books Written And Environmental Pressure Produces

Why Are Biology Books Written With The Main Idea Of Evolution
Essay Preview: Why Are Biology Books Written With The Main Idea Of Evolution
Report this essay
Question: Why are biology books written as if everyone believes in evolution?
I am a creationist, and I am offended by the way the text is written.
I havent taken biology for three years because the last text I read
made fun of creationists as people who believe in the “pseudo-science.”
Judi Y Wu
Answer 1: Biology is a science, and, as such, is based on the scientific
method. As long as creationism is based on faith and religion,
I see nothing wrong with it: why couldnt God have created an
evolving universe? Saying that creationism is science merely
demonstrates an ignorance of the definition of science.
Please try to understand what the scientific method *means*!
Jade Hawk
Answer 2:
We might distinguish between “evolution,” meaning the process by which
environmental pressure produces fitter species, and “Evolution,” the process
we think produced human beings starting from amoebas, more or less.
The first is not a subject of rational debate: it is an observable fact.
If you stomp on reproducing species in a certain way, then they will
gradually become more resistant to that kind of stomping — they will
adapt to their environment. The existence of new, drug-resistant strains
of tuberculosis or the fact that HIV kills people only after a number of
years are both direct observations over a short time (decades) of evolution
in bacteria and viruses. There are many other cases cited in the usual
evolution literature, e.g. the moths in England that became dark to hide
against soot-blackened trees at the beginning of the Industrial Revolution.
But lets not confuse evolution with Evolution. Even if we grant that
bacteria or moths can evolve over a period of decades or centuries, simply
because we can watch them do it, how can we imagine *people* evolving from
*bacteria*, even over a much longer period? Understandably this is a lot
harder to swallow. There have been many objections raised to this
proposal, and the best of them are quite insightful and cannot be dismissed
with a laugh. For example: in the nineteenth century, when Evolution was
first proposed, the age of the Earth as estimated by the geologists was
only a few millions of years, and even the most ardent Evolution supporters
did not consider this enough time for Evolution to have done its work.
Today we know from radioisotope dating that the Earth is a lot older and
time enough for Evolution has indeed passed. Number 2: the fossil record
is far from complete. Youve heard of the Missing Link between people and
apes? There are many missing links, many places where the chain of
Evolution is presumed to link preceding to following species, but where
there