A Brief Exchange on Evolution

In a recent exchange with Cory Heidelberger I made these comments:

I am opposed to creationism in the public curriculum, and likewise I oppose intelligent design theory.  On the other hand, I know from experience that students who favor the Biblical creation story over Darwinian evolution get much more interested in the discussion of evolution when the two stories are brought together in the classroom.  Governor Palin suggested in a debate that there was no reason the two "theories" could not be taught together.  I think that was a risky suggestion.  It needs to be made clear that evolution is what is being taught in science classes, because evolution is science and the Biblical story is not.

This, I suspect, was what drew a reader to send me this e-mail:

Evolution is not science.  Period.  (DB).

To which I replied:

Yes it is.  Colon.  It has a theory, and the theory generates a vast number of research programs which you can read about in lots of places.  It is the foundation of all the modern life sciences.  There are surely tens of thousands of biologists teaching, and doing research across the globe.  You might find a few hundred who have some significant doubts some aspects of the theory, just as you will find a few physicists who think that the theory of relativity is flawed.  None of them will argue that evolution is not science.  Even the Intelligent Design folks will readily admit that evolution is a genuine science, and that most of it is in fact sound and correct.  They challenge only the proposition of macroevolution due to random mutation.  I have to say that this is good enough for me. 

Not only is Darwinian evolution a science, but it is one of the most successful sciences over the last century.  That is about all I can say in reply without knowing more about the grounds of your claim. 

Thanks for the note.

Ken