Why People Believe in Evolution

In an on-stage interview, the Darwin Disciple and belligerent atheist, Richard Dawkins, was asked this question: “ . . . could there be one sentence that could convince a creationist to seriously doubt their theory, and ideally if you could convince a believer in God to really doubt their belief . . . .”

Dawkins, Ethologist, Zoologist, and Evolutionary Biologist responded thus: “. . . I think perhaps the single most convincing fact/observation you could point to would be the pattern of resemblances that you see when you compare the genes using modern DNA techniques – actually looking at the letter to letter correspondences between genes – compare the genes of any pair of animals you like, a pair of animals, a pair of plants and then plot out the resemblances and they fall on a perfect hierarchy, a perfect family tree, and the only alternative to it being a family tree is that the intelligent designer deliberately set out to deceive us in the most underhand and devious manner. More and more over the same thing works with every gene you do separately and even pseudo genes that don't do anything but are vestigial relics of genes that once that once did something. I find it extremely hard to imagine how any creationist who actually bothered to listen to that could possibly doubt the fact of

evolution but they don't listen. I mean there's your question is a perfectly good question but it's not it's not really relevant because what they do is simply stick their fingers in their ear and say la la la. They know what's true because it's in the holy book. Even in the most extreme case is the geologist Curt Wise, who has a PhD in geology from Harvard and said “if all the evidence in the universe pointed towards an Old Earth I would be the first to admit it but I would still be a young earth creationist because that is what Holy Scripture teaches me.”

Dawkins continues: “You cannot argue with a mind like that - a mind like that it seems to me is well a disgrace to the human species.”

And with that the audience claps hands and applauds.

Perhaps the applause was for Dawkins’ trademark derogatory statement at the end, even if the quote was incorrect. Dawkins has had many debates and discussions with creationists, and real philosophers, and his own words can equally be held against him: “You cannot argue with a mind like that - a mind like that it seems to me is well-- a disgrace to the human species.” In Dawkins’ worldview amoral evolutionary world there is no such moral value as “disgrace”

But Dawkins also misrepresents the science.

“. . . compare the genes using modern DNA techniques – . . looking at the letter to letter correspondences between genes – compare the genes of any pair of animals you like, a pair of animals, a pair of plants and then plot out the resemblances . . . “

Similarity between genes of different species is not necessarily an argument for evolution but is an argument for design. For example, basic good engineering principles for building a sound bridge would be the same good engineering principles for building many other bridges. This is design.

Clouds are 100% water. Watermelons are 97%. It's only 3% difference. That proves they're related. Jellyfish are 98%, the missing link!

The Toyota Camry 3.5 V6 engine is also found in the Lotus Evora (as well as the Exige). Lotus supercharged the Camry engine for the Evora. Does that mean that both the Camry and the Evora evolved from an oil well? No. Lotus considered the design of the Camry engine was good enough to supercharge for their Evora. Leg and arm bone structure in land animals look similar because their design is good. Toyota and Lotus are designed and built in different factories and some bone structures originate from different genes. This is an argument from design.

Then Dawkins mentions “pseudo genes that don't do anything but are vestigial relics”

Pseudogenes have long been labeled as “junk” DNA, failed copies of genes that arise during the evolution of genomes. However, recent research is challenging this. Indeed, some pseudogenes appear to regulate protein-coding. Far from being silent relics, many pseudogenes are transcribed into RNA, some exhibiting a tissue-specific pattern of activation. Pseudogene transcripts can be processed into short interfering RNAs that regulate coding genes through the RNAi pathway. In another remarkable discovery, it has been shown that pseudogenes are capable of regulating tumour suppressors and oncogenes by acting as microRNA decoys.

Don’t tell me that Dawkins did not know this. He is either living 30 years in the past or is deliberately deceiving his eager listeners.

But why do people believe in evolution?

Firstly, the propaganda machine in the media and institutions of learning is so huge that it is suffocating. But the evolutionists are not happy. Anybody that shows dissent or questions evolution gets sacked from their jobs, victimised and ridiculed. You can watch the movie ‘Expelled’ for more on that subject. It is telling though that evolutionists go to such great lengths to silence those who disagree with them. And the creationist arguments are valid and strong as this book demonstrates..

Secondly, the question ‘why do people believe in evolution’, the decent from molecules to man is actually marvellously simple. The answer cuts through all of the presuppositions and postulations of evolutionary thought. It cuts through all the pseudoscience and gets down simply to brass tacks.

Here is the answer. The goal of evolutionary thought and so called evolutionary science is not to

discover our origins. The goal of evolutionary thought is to unshackle humanity from God. If humanity is a creation of a creator then that means that humanity as creature is responsible to its creator. Belief in evolution is to believe that there is no creator, that everything happened by random chance if there is no God who created all of this. That means there is no one to whom we are responsible. If there is no one to whom you are responsible then we do whatever we want. Primarily this is a moral question about objective moral values and responsibilities that transcend personal subjective values. Thou shalt NOT . . . . .

To be unshackled from God cuts through everything. For example the ecology. The creationist believes that we are responsible to God as to how we treat the created order – while the evolutionist bows to man-made state institutions to enforce man made laws and regulations. As the power of these man-made institutions grows, so does the political power of those who run them to the detriment of the individual. Genesis 3 demonstrates how mankind tries to be like God. Whether you are a believer or not, this means that mankind in this story is attempting to be like God, is attempting to be God themselves – making their own rules and being an authority themselves. Well we have seen what that utopia brought us last century. Over 120 million people dead in trying to cut God out of the utopian picture.

If you are like God then you are God's equal and he has no claim over you. So belief in evolution

unshackles you from God and once you are unshackled from God and His law then you are able to be your own God and you can do whatever you want. Freedom from offense against religious or moral law and subsequent divine condemnation is ultimately why some people want to believe that they are descendant from monkeys, automatons, running on biological processes (See chapter in free will and determinism)