Evolution targeted in newspaper commentary

I don’t know who Paul James is, but he wrote a newspaper commentary for the Palm Beach Post about evolution. Judging from the title “Evolution doesn’t answer all of science’s questions“, it is already evident that the writer isn’t the most knowledgeable person in matters of science. Of course, James probably didn’t pick that headline himself; nonetheless, it does encapsulate his written thoughts. Here is his first paragraph:

The United States is losing its world prominence in academics, and science may be suffering the most. But two researchers at the University of Pennsylvania claim to have found the cause: high school biology teachers who do not advocate the theory of evolution.

I’ve read the book Michael B. Berkman and Eric Plutzer wrote on this subject, and I don’t believe either had stated that poor evolution education is the cause of the U.S.’s downfall in academics. It’s a sign or symptom, but I don’t think the authors had called it a cause. Maybe they said something different in their journal paper.

Another paragraph from the commentary:

Although the courts have ruled that creationism is not science, not all scientists would agree. In The Case for Creation, author Lee Strobel shares interviews with top scientists in their fields who have found evidence of intelligent design in cosmology, physics, astronomy, biochemistry and biology. Yet it is exactly the presentation of such scientific evidence the Penn State researchers find so problematic.

Any biologist worth his or her salt most certainly would and do agree. Creationism is a religious claim, pure and simple. Creationism cannot be tested, has no credible evidence and makes no useful scientific predictions. I’ve read The Case for Creation and found it to be nothing more than a overly long church bulletin. I was disgusted by the book’s advertising blurbs that claim Strobel used his hard-hitting investigative journalism skills to ask the tough questions on this subject. What a load of manure! He lobbed softball questions at his interviewees and either misrepresented or completely ignored the scientific counter-arguments.

James’ main problem with evolution seems to be that he claims it is devoid of any real meaning. Teenagers will take away from an evolution lesson that we are nothing more than worthless clumps of cells, he says. I think James misses the point of science. It helps us understand how the universe works. It’s not really meant to impart morals or meaning. However, I do think that evolution and biology in general does impart a sense of awe and wonder. It shows how we are connected to the life all around us, past, present, and future. To me, that is magnificent and meaningful.