Book Reviews
PLEASE ENCOURAGE AUTHOR BY COMMENTING
LEAVE COMMENT ON ARTICLE As A Member OR Visitor
Message Writer
Hire Writer
Report Article
LEAVE COMMENT ON ARTICLE As A Member OR Visitor
Message Writer
Hire Writer
Report Article
Why Evolution is True
Jerry A. Coyne
© 2009
ISBN: 978-0-670-02053-9
Viking Group
New York, NY
282 pages, $27.95
I came across “Why Evolution is True” a few weeks ago. It is written by Dr. Jerry A. Coyne. Googling the author, I saw that Coyne is a highly educated and famous biology professor at the University of Chicago well known for his criticism of intelligent design. Two years ago, he received The Emperor Has No Clothes Award from the Freedom from Religion Foundation. Curious about what he has to say, I decided to read his book. Let me say at the offset, I was never comfortable with the Theory of Evolution. I though I ought to read this proof by a professional biologist to put any doubt in my mind to rest.
Coyne said recently in an interview that one reason people mistrust Darwinism is a lack of familiarity with the evidence. That’s why he wrote “Why Evolution Is True.” When asked about the credibility of creationism, Coyne said “I don't agree with that. The other side doesn't have any credibility. It's not that we have two theories here, both of which have good reasons to explain the data. It's that one of them has explained the data, and the other was ruled out a hundred years ago.” When asked, “What would you say to a creationist who read the book and remained unconvinced?” Coyne said “I'd like to find out why. I guess that's the first thing I'd ask him. And if he said, ‘Well, what you told me contravenes the Bible’—which is going to be the reason—then I would say, I'm sorry, I can't talk to you anymore. You can't be convinced by reason and evidence.” Challenged, I decided to read his book.
In the preface to his book, Coyne writes: “You can find religions without creationism, but you never find creationism without religion.” But he also states: “Enlightened Religion has always found a way to accommodate the advances of science. In fact, understanding evolution should surely deepen and enrich our appreciation of the living world and our place in it.”
In his book, Coyne mentions the Asian Giant hornet, “one of the marvels of evolution. The world’s largest hornet, it has a two-inch body, fearsome jaws and a quarter-inch stinger that is lethal even to humans. This hornet is marvelously adapted to kill—it looks as though it were designed for mass slaughter.” I’m surprised he used the word “designed” when the theory holds there is nobody capable of designing an organism. It seems like there is some residual perception, even with evolutionists, that there is some intelligent design somewhere in the universe. I see this often in television documentaries on nature. They invariably attribute evolutionary change to some recognition of how it will benefit survival, which is an appeal to my intelligence that can recognize the value of the change, but there is no intelligence proposed by the theory that can recognize anything before the evolutionary change is made. That’s the rub with me. I think even an evolutionist has trouble envisioning the world evolving devoid of intelligence.
Coyne discusses how sex drives evolution, he writes: “Creationists could never explain why a super designer should produce gaudy feathers and heavy antlers in one sex and not in the other.” Coyne mentions that Darwin had postulated sexual selection as a selection that increases a male’s chance of mating. Coyne writes: This is done in two ways. One way is to provide a means to fight off rivals; the other is a means to make a male more attractive. Coyne also discusses sexual selection in humans. An empress in Asia, for example, might have a penchant for men with straight black hair and almond shaped eyes. By creating a fashion, her preference spreads culturally to all her female subjects.” Coyne continues that this ’good-genes model’ remains the favorite explanation of sexual selection. These models assume that the evolution of sexual dimorphisms is driven simply by pre-existing biases in a female’s nervous system.”
I think this “good genes model” requires the intelligent choice of the female human, whom we all know is intelligent, but positing the same thing for animals is a stretch of the imagination. I think an all-knowing creator guiding animals through instinct is a much better explanation. To me, Coyne’s argument presupposes that there is indeed a design that helps the organism in its survival. Animals recognize it and humans can certainly recognize it. That’s Coyne’s point here, but where was the intelligence that recognized it beforehand? It is much more sensible for me to presume that God designed things this way.
Coyne quotes Darwin: “After sleeping through a hundred million centuries we have finally opened our eyes on a sumptuous planet, sparkling with color, beautiful with life. Within decades we must close our eyes again. Isn’t it a noble, an enlightened way of spending our brief time in the sun, to work at understanding the universe and how we can come to wake up in it? This is how I answer when I am asked—as I am surprisingly often—why I bother to get up in the mornings.”
I’m confused by what this is supposed to mean. Does Darwin think that I’m part of the “we”? I am not part of the “we”. If the Theory of Evolution is correct in proving that God does not exist, than I and all the rest of us individual human beings simply become extinct when we die. If Darwin supposes that all human are connected, even after physical death, into some collective “we”, then that “we” is no longer a subject for the physical sciences. “We” is now a spiritual collective. That’s what I am choking on. There is no spiritual “we” according to the Theory of Evolution, and there is no God; therefore, after I die, there is only extinction.
Coyne says civilization began about 4000 BC. He goes on to say that “250 generations of civilized society lie atop 300,000 years during which we may have been hunters-gatherers living in small social groups”. Figuring 24 years per generation, would give 12,500 generations of hunter gatherers. Doesn’t anyone speculate on the extraordinary difference in capability between humans and pre-humans? Coyne writes: “We are the one creature to whom natural selection has bequeathed a brain complex enough to comprehend the laws of the universe. And we should be proud that that we are the only species that has figured out how we came to be.” I think it’s much more than a physical brain that explains the ability of humans to comprehend the laws of the universe. Even Coyne’s use of the word “laws” confuses the issue again. We all know what the word “laws” implies. Attributing “laws” to random chance events is confusing. A law implies an intelligent lawgiver governing those chance events. If there is no intelligent lawgiver, why talk about laws? Sometimes those who argue against intelligence governing the universe use words that do not precisely get across their arguments.
I think the spectacular rate of technological advance in human civilization during 250 generations compared to 12,500 generations of virtually no technological advance argues that there is a significant change in human nature compared to pre-humans. In my lifetime, I have seen technological advances I never would have believed possible. If one were to plot human technological advances against time starting at the beginning of civilization, with time being the vertical axis, the curve would start off horizontal and rapidly, exponentially, curve toward a vertical position. No animal displays that magnitude of advance in technology. Animals that have been on this earth far longer than humans show no advance at all. I think there is something different with humans. I think humans have a spiritual side to their nature as well as a physical side. I think humans are free persons given the ability to improve the conditions of their lives.
It appears that there are two sides to Dr. Coyne. One side is the scholarly anthropologist side, which should be fueled by a genuine desire to discover truth by an honest examination of the fossil evidence. The other side is a man with a political bias against the idea that a supreme God exists. The Freedom of Religion Foundation of which Coyne is a member states: The purposes of the Freedom From Religion Foundation, Inc., as stated in its bylaws, are to promote the constitutional principle of separation of state and church, and to educate the public on matters relating to non-theism.”
Dr. Coyne accepted the Freedom From Religion Foundation’s Emperor Has No Clothes Award with a speech on Oct. 8, 2011, in Hartford, Conn. He said: “It’s not because people aren’t aware of the facts. We have people like myself and Dawkins, Carl Sagan and Steve Gould that have been promulgating evolution for years and years . . . Religion prevents people from accepting evolution, the great religion destroyer. As the years went on, I gradually transmogrified from being an evolutionary biologist to an evolutionary biologist atheist. Now I’m more of an atheist than an evolutionary biologist . . . My opposition to religion goes far beyond its effects on teaching evolution, but I want to concentrate today on its effects on science in general and in particular on a topic that’s been of great interest lately: The so-called harmony of religion and science. I titled my talk “The Odd Couple: Why Science and Religion Can’t Cohabit,” because it’s an attack on the view that science and religion are not only compatible but can be buddies, that both have ways of finding out stuff in this world. That’s complete hogwash. Today I want to tell you why, as a scientist who has studied religion painfully.”
This other side of Dr. Coyne is not a scholarly professor searching for the truth. This side is a political activist with a mission to drive religion out of civil society. This is what I’m choking on in Coyne’s book. I think Coyne spoiled a scholarly work on anthropology with trying to push atheism onto his readers. My main criticism of the Theory of Evolution is that it goes far beyond a scientific explanation of how the world was made and how different species come into being through the ages. It tries to refute the common human presumption that God created the world.
I spite of my criticism of this book, I like to point out that I think the Theory of Evolution presents a believable scientific explanation of how the different species appeared in the world, and it could fit very well as a human understanding of how God did it, but to suppose that this theory proves that God did not create man is farfetched. Was Dr. Coyne present when man first came into existence? How would he know? All he has to go on are a few hundred bones of extinct hominoids and the testimony of Darwin. Darwin also was not present when man first came into existence, and Darwin had fewer fossil bones at his disposal than Coyne has. How does either one of them know how and when man first appeared? They are offering me their opinion that they want me to accept on faith in the accuracy of their word. I can’t verify it. The best I can do is to accept what they say on faith, accepting it on the credibility of their witness, but that’s not enough for me.
The very Biblical passage that evolutionists object to: that God made man from the clay of the Earth, isn’t clay composed of the same 98 elements that everything else in the universe is composed of? What is incorrect in saying God made man out of clay, or even if the wording were “out of the elements,” or even “out of some pre-existing organism that had it’s origin from clay?” All those statements claim substantially the same origin for the body of the first man.
As far as credibility goes, the Biblical account of the origin of man comes from Moses. We all know God inspired Moses to bring the Israelites out of slavery and to compose The Torah, the book containing the laws God wanted the Israelites to abide by. God also had Moses write the history of the Exodus and to compile the ancient traditions and history of the Israelites selecting, under God’s inspiration, which traditions Moses should preserve and which ones to reject. That makes Moses the redactor of Genesis, but God is the authority behind what Moses included into the book. The Torah including Genesis has been accepted as the revealed word of God for some 3300 years. I prefer to place my faith in this witness by someone who was a prophet selected by God rather place my faith in what Darwin proposed 100 years ago.
Coyne writes in the preface of his book: “Enlightened Religion has always found a way to accommodate the advances of science. In fact, understanding evolution should surely deepen and enrich our appreciation of the living world and our place in it.” That’s a two way street. An honest search by scientists and religious, if they really were serious about arriving at the truth, could, I think, arrive at a correct understanding if they wanted to. I object to Coyne’s assuming the political mantle of militant atheism and disguising it as science. This puts a political slant to his book. That’s what I object to. He puts his entire expertise as an anthropologist behind his insistence that God does not exist, and thereby lost, in my eyes, his credibility.
I have no problem accepting that the procedures God used appear to by very much like the Theory of Evolution describes. It’s Coyne’s insistence that this theory proves that God does not exist that I cannot accept. How can a scientific theory that is based on observation and experiment prove that a spiritual being does not exist? A spiritual being cannot be observed and examined. That’s the rub for me. The nature of God, even his existence, is beyond observation and experimentation to science. Nobody can observe God or perform scientific tests to verify his existence. The only avenue any of us have to approach God is to believe the revelation he has made.
It’s dangerous for me to refuse to believe Scripture because it has been revealed that there are more spiritual beings than God in existence. God created many angels and endowed them with free will like he conferred to us humans. One-third of them rebelled against God and interfere with the rest of God’s creation, and they try to influence me to choose against God just like they did. I worry about evolutionists that are so insistent that God does not exist. I think they can easily be deluded into supposing that, since they are the only intelligence that has ever appeared in the world, they are like God themselves, and are chosen by evolution to bring rational sense to the world.
One more shot at evolution. Revelation indicates that the reason so many angels rebelled against God is that they wanted to be like God themselves. I think fallen angels are tempting some humans, especially humans much more intelligent than me, to take pride in their intelligence and, I suppose, presume that eventually humans will evolve into gods themselves. I don’t want any part of that.
PLEASE ENCOURAGE AUTHOR BELOW LEAVE COMMENT ON ARTICLE AS A MEMBER OR VISITOR
Reader Count & Comments
Date
The opinions expressed by authors do not necessarily reflect the opinion of FaithWriters.com. This is especially true with articles that
deal with personal healthcare and prophecy. We encourage the reader to make their own decision in consultation with God, His Word, and others as needed.
This article has been read 1373 times < Previous | Next >
Read more articles by Maurice A. Williams or search for other articles by topic below.
This article has been read 1373 times < Previous | Next >
Search for articles on: (e.g. creation; holiness etc.)
Read more by clicking on a link:Free Reprints
Main Site Articles
Most Read Articles
Highly Acclaimed Challenge Articles.
New Release Christian Books for Free for a Simple Review.
NEW - Surprise Me With an Article - Click here for a random URL
God is Not Against You - He Came on an All Out Rescue Mission to Save You
...in Christ God was reconciling the world to himself, not counting their trespasses against them... 2 Cor 5:19
Therefore, my friends, I want you to know that through Jesus the forgiveness of sins is proclaimed to you. Acts 13:38
LEARN & TRUST JESUS HERE
FaithWriters offers Christian reading material for Christian readers. We offer Christian articles, Christian fiction, Christian non-fiction, Christian Bible studies, Christian poems, Christian articles for sale, free use Christian articles, Christian living articles, New Covenant Christian Bible Studies, Christian magazine articles and new Christian articles. We write for Jesus about God, the Bible, salvation, prayer and the word of God.