We've all heard that the theory of evolution is absolutely essential to understanding all of biology, if not all of science. Indeed, it'd be the end of science, some fear, should any competing theory be taught along side Darwinism in our high schools and colleges. So why, Sal Cordova wonders, are so few college students required to take a course in evolution and why do so many biologists think that evolution as a discipline is "near the bottom" of the scientific pecking order?
Cordova cites the following statements made by respected Darwinian biologists:
"In science's pecking order, evolutionary biology lurks somewhere near the bottom, far closer to phrenology than to physics." Jerry Coyne
"There's a striking asymmetry in molecular versus evolutionary education in American universities. Although many science, and all biology, students are required to endure molecular courses, evolution-even introductory evolution-is often an elective. The reason is simple: biochemistry and cell biology get Junior into med school, evolution doesn't. Consequently, many professional scientists know surprisingly little about evolution." Allen Orr
Cordova goes to no less an authority than Ernst Mayr for the reason evolution doesn't get junior into med school:
"Evolutionary biology, in contrast with physics and chemistry, is a historical science...[where] Laws and experiments are inappropriate...Instead one constructs a ... narrative."
So, if Darwinian assumptions are of secondary importance to the work being done by many people working in the biological sciences, why are we so frequently subjected to fearsome prophecies of doom and gloom if public school students are allowed to hear that some scientists believe that intelligence somehow played a role in the ascent of life? Could the fears of the Darwinians be overblown - or maybe insincere?
