The Washington Post reported Fossils Challenge Old Evoluton Theory.
"The old theory is that the first and oldest species in our family tree, Homo habilis, evolved into Homo erectus, which then became human, Homo sapiens. But [Meave] Leakey's find suggests those two earlier species lived side-by-side about 1.5 million years ago in parts of Kenya for at least half a million years"
"This is not questioning the idea at all of evolution; it is refining some of the specific points," Anton said. "This is a great example of what science does and religion doesn't do. It's a continous self-testing process."
2 comments:
Howard quotes - "This is a great example of what science does and religion doesn't do. It's a continous self-testing process."
This is not true. Yes, there are certain Christian fundamentalist denominations that insist on a literal interpretation of the Book of Genesis, but that is not "religion". Classic Christian naturalist theology goes back at least as far as Augustine in the third century, who said that if biblical interpretation didn't mesh with observed facts, it was the interpretation that was wrong.
There are serious scientists who are also religious, and serious theologists who do not question the validity of the modern science. Both the Roman Catholic and Anglican churches both accept evolution.
I don't want to go into a long apologetic about the role of theology and religion in terms of understanding of human existence, and the "rational" approach that at least classic Western theology takes. But to caricature religion based on a fundamentalist rants is misleading at best, and certainly not a "scientific" generalization.
(BTW, the church got a bad reputation on "science" because of Copernicus. The trial was not about the validity of Copernicus' model, which was already accepted at the time and widely used in sea navigation, but about Copernicus' claim that he - not the church - had the right to provide the authoritative reinterpretation of the Bible in light of his model. It didn't help that Copernicus had publicly embarrassed the Pope who was one of Copernicus' personal friends and one of his biggest supporters up until that time.)
I completely concede your "fundamentalist" vs "religion" point. His words, but I quoted it and didn't explain.
Didn't know that about Copernicus.
Post a Comment