Critique of the letter by Creationist-62

Ian Stone (Biochemist) - he has been writing to South China Morning Post regularly since the row on the Biology curriculum erupted in February 2009. This is an article he contributed.

The Concern Group for Hong Kong Science Education deserves support to ensure the public knows who is attempting to introduce supernatural “alternatives” into biology curriculum. (Debate over creationism should be out in the open June, 12 2009) .

The letter from Prof. Tsui's "Creationist 64" to the Education Bureau is a perfect example of how creationism distorts science education to promote religious agendas. I believe most co-signers would modify their position if they were informed in the scientific specialties of evolutionary biology.

Three issues need to be addressed.

1. It is very important for the Education Bureau definition of science to be consistent with international science institutions and specifically exclude supernatural explanations for natural phenomena from science curricula.

   • Science is well defined in all major dictionaries and Wikipedia. It does not include unmeasurable, unpredictable supernatural explanations. By definition gods, spirits and the Christian God are outside the material, space and time dimensions of science, therefore they should not be included in science education.

2. Prof. Tsui's letter appears to be cut and pasted from American evangelical sources whose starting point is the literal interpretation of their bible. The science is wrong for the following reasons:

• The implied "intelligent designer" is impossible to detect or measure therefore it is outside science. Michael Behe’s "irreducible complexity" was debunked by scientists in the Dover trial and Wayne Dembski's mathematical method to detect design failed to pass simple challenges from 3D models.

• Imagine the consequences if "intelligent design" were to be accepted as an explanation for the occurrence of SARS, Avian Flu, H1N1, HIV, ebola, congenital heart disease, slipped disks, detached retinas, autism, parasitic worms and malaria!

• The assertion that macro-evolution cannot produce new species has been proven wrong with thousands of examples of speciation observed in nature and in laboratories. The differentiation of micro and macro-evolution is a ploy to distort evolution. Macro-evolution is the accumulation of micro evolutionary changes in separated populations and gene pools over time.

The alternative explanation for origin of new species on earth would be instantaneous creation of species out of thin air either by God as taught in creationist text books or constructed by mysterious intelligent designers. Such species creators would have to be very busy building millions of new species as others went extinct.

• • For a thorough scientific discussion see "29+ Evidences for Macroevolution, Scientific "Proof", scientific evidence, and the scientific method" by Douglas Theobald, Ph.D. at http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/comdesc/sciproof.html

• Gaps and "major scientific problems" are no excuse to claim supernatural explanations. Science has overcome millions of "major problems" to explain disease, weather, earthquakes, the relationship of the sun, moon and stars and our relationships with other organisms. The "problems" which can be attributed to God, are getting fewer every day.

• Origin of life research is generating exciting results. All the organic building blocks of life, RNA, DNA, amino acids, peptides, lipids, and even self replicating nucleic acids can easily be generated abiotically. We’ve come a long way since Stanley Miller’s first experiments in 1953. Would the ID creationists ask us to stop this fascinating research and revert to pre-scientific hand written Aramaic explanations instead?

• The "sudden jumps" over hundreds of millions of years between kingdoms or genera are not evidence of spontaneous creation of species. The 80 million years of the “Cambrian explosion” of multi cellular life forms was hardly "sudden".

• Gaps in the fossil record are to be expected. It is incomplete and imperfect but growing every day. Some gaps would be predicted by migrations of separated species into habitats of ancestor species. Other gaps are being filled by daily discoveries of intermediate species.

• There wasn't a sudden prokaryote-eukaryote "transition" which begs for a supernatural explanation. Prokaryotes are single celled organisms without nuclei, including bacteria, which still outnumber us. Research on bacteria from mud, underground rocks and other inhospitable habitats, have produced insights into the biochemistry and evolution of cellular structures, including eukaryote nuclei via fusion or ingestion of some bacteria by others. Mitochondria in our own cells and chloroplasts closely resemble existing prokaryotes and reproduce independently within eukaryotic cells. Spirochete proteins indicate origins of flagella and microtubules used in eukaryote cell division.

• • See “What is life” and other works by Lynn Margulis and Dorion Sagan who were involved with NASA on the programs to seek signs of extra terrestrial life.

1. Christians can reconcile their faith with the growing wealth of discoveries enhancing the understanding of scientific fact of evolution.

   • The Catholic, cell biologist, Prof. Kenneth Miller in his book “Finding Darwin’s God” demonstrates that Christians can discard creationist dogma and embrace the science of evolution. His book contains scientific exposés of the non-science of creationist intelligent design hero Michael Behe.

I strongly recommend the “Creationist 64” to learn more about the science of evolution so they don’t feed their students with misinformation. Two excellent resources are “Cassell's Atlas of Evolution: The Earth, its Landscape, and Life Forms” and “Origins: The Evolution of Continents, Oceans, and Life” by Ron Redfern.