EDITORIAL Science, evolution, and creationism Francisco J. Ayala Department of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology, University of California, 321 Steinhaus Hall, Irvine, CA 92697 n December 20, 2005, John E. about by chance but rather manifest to biological connections with other living Jones III, federal judge for the have been designed for serving certain things. It provides an understanding of the Middle District of Pennsylva- functions and for certain ways of life. constantly evolving bacteria and viruses nia, issued a 130-page-long de- The second prong of the argument is and enables the development of effective Ocision (Kitzmiller v. Dover Area School Dis- that only an omnipotent Creator could new ways to protect ourselves against the trict) declaring that ‘‘The overwhelming account for the perfection and func- diseases they cause. Evolution has made evidence at trial established that ID [intel- tional design of organisms. In the 1990s, possible improvements in agriculture and ligent design] is a religious view, a mere several authors in the United States re- medicine and has been applied in many re-labeling of creationism, and not a sci- vived the argument from design but fields outside biology, including forensics entific theory . ID is not supported by modified the second prong of the argu- and software engineering; it has stimu- any peer-reviewed research, data, or ment by referring to an unspecified ‘‘in- lated chemists, for example, to use the publications.’’ telligent designer,’’ thus avoiding explicit principles of natural selection for develop- In 1984, the National Academy of Sci- reference to God, so that the argument ing new molecules with specific functions. ences (NAS) published Science and Cre- Darwin and other 19th-century biolo- ationism: A View from the National gists found compelling evidence for bio- Academy of Sciences. A second edition ‘‘Nothing makes sense in logical evolution in the comparative study was published in 1999. A third edition, of living organisms, their geographic dis- sufficiently modified to deserve a new biology except in the tribution, and the fossil remains of extinct title, Science, Evolution, and Creationism, organisms. Since Darwin’s time, biological published on January 4, 2008 (1). light of evolution.’’ disciplines that emerged more recently— Science and Creationism was prepared genetics, biochemistry, ecology, animal by a committee of the NAS in response to behavior, neurobiology, and especially statutes passed by the legislatures of, first, from design could be taught in the pub- molecular biology—have supplied power- the state of Arkansas, and shortly thereaf- lic schools as an alternative to evolution. ful additional evidence and detailed con- ter, the state of Louisiana, that required Judge Jones, like so many other inde- firmation. Accordingly, evolutionists are that ‘‘creation science’’ be taught in public pendent observers, saw through this no longer concerned with obtaining evi- schools together with evolution. The Loui- hypocritical subterfuge and determined, dence to support the fact of evolution. siana ‘‘Creation Act’’ was appealed all the moreover, that the argument lacks any Rather, evolutionary research nowadays way to the U.S. Supreme Court, which in scientific cogency whatsoever. seeks to understand further and in more 1987 (Edwards v. Aguilard) concluded that Science, Evolution, and Creationism con- detail how the process of evolution occurs. the act’s ‘‘primary purpose was to change sists of three main chapters. The first Yet, the evidence from paleontology and the public school science curriculum to chapter briefly describes the process of the older disciplines continues to accumu- provide persuasive advantage to a particu- evolution and the nature of science in late, such as the discovery published in 2006 and described in Science, Evolution, lar religious doctrine that rejects the fac- contrast to other forms of knowledge. The and Creationism of Tiktaalik,afishthat tual basis of evolution in its entirety. Thus, second chapter surveys the scientific evi- lived in shallow freshwater streams and the Act is designed either to promote the dence that supports evolution from di- swamps approximately 380 million years theory of creation science that embodies a verse disciplines that include astronomy, ago (4, 5). Tiktaalik is a nearly precise particular religious tenet or to prohibit the paleontology, comparative anatomy, bio- intermediate between typical fish and the teaching of a scientific theory disfavored geography, molecular biology, genetics, first known four-legged animals from by certain religious sects. In either case, and anthropology. The third chapter ex- which would evolve all animals that live the Act violates the First Amendment’’ (1, amines intelligent design and other cre- on the land from frogs to reptiles, to p. 45). Science and Creationism was made ationist perspectives so as to point out the birds, and to mammals, including humans. part of an ‘‘amicus brief’’ submitted to the scientific and legal reasons against teach- No intermediate fossils between humans Supreme Court in Edwards v. Aguilard by ing creationism in public school science and apes were known in Darwin’s time. the NAS, with the endorsement of the classes. The text concludes with a selec- Now, thousands of remains are known American Association for the Advance- tion of frequently asked questions and that belong to the human lineage after it ment of Science and other organizations. additional readings. separated from the lineage that goes to Argument from Design Evolution and Natural Selection the apes. Biological evolution is part of a com- The ‘‘argument from design’’ for the In 1973, the eminent evolutionist Theodo- pelling historical narrative that scientists existence of God, based on the complex sius Dobzhansky famously asserted that have constructed over the last few cen- organization of living things, was elabo- (3). Biological evolution is the central or- turies. The narrative begins with the for- rated by English clergyman William Pa- ganizing principle of modern biology. mation of the universe, the solar system, ley in his Natural Theology, published in Evolution provides a scientific explanation and the Earth, where conditions occur 1802 (2). Paley’s argument from design for why there are so many different kinds suitable for life to evolve. There are the- is two-tined. The first prong asserts that of organisms on Earth and gives an ac- ories that seek to account for how life humans, as well as all sorts of organ- count of their similarities and differences originated on Earth, but none of them isms, in their wholes, in their parts, and (morphological, physiological, and ge- in their relations to one another and to netic). It accounts for the appearance of their environment, could not have come humans on Earth and reveals our species’ @ 2008 by The National Academy of Sciences of the USA www.pnas.org͞cgi͞doi͞10.1073͞pnas.0711608105 PNAS ͉ January 8, 2008 ͉ vol. 105 ͉ no. 1 ͉ 3–4 has gathered enough supporting evi- drawn from examining the natural world other education leaders, policy makers, dence to be generally accepted by scien- and rely exclusively on natural processes legal scholars, and others in the commu- tists. But natural selection, discovered to account for natural phenomena. Sci- nity who are committed to providing by Darwin, has been convincingly dem- entific explanations are subject to em- students with quality science education.’’ onstrated as the process that accounts pirical tests by means of observation and Moreover, as stated in the preface, Sci- for the adaptive configuration and func- experimentation and are subject to the ence, Evolution, and Creationism ‘‘is also tion of organisms (for their ‘‘design’’). possibility of modification and rejection. directed to the broader audience of Darwin’s greatest contribution to sci- Religious faith, in contrast, does not de- high-school and college students as well ence is not that he accumulated evi- pend on empirical tests and is not sub- as adults who wish to become more fa- dence demonstrating the evolution of ject to the possibility of rejection based miliar with the many strands of evidence life, but that he discovered natural se- on empirical evidence. The significance supporting evolution and to understand lection, the process that accounts for the and purpose of the world and human why evolution is both a fact and a pro- design of organisms and their wonderful life, as well as issues concerning moral cess that accounts for the diversity of adaptations to survive and reproduce in and religious values, are of great impor- life on Earth.’’ the environments where they live, in- tance to many people, perhaps a major- A related document, You Say You Want cluding wings for flying, legs for run- ity of humans, but these are matters that an Evolution? A Role for Scientists in Sci- ning, eyes to see, and kidneys that transcend science. ence Education, recently has been made regulate the composition of the blood. Many people have questions about public (7). This document is sponsored by biological evolution. They may have Evolution and Religion been told that scientific understanding 17 scientific societies, representing the Scientists and religious authors have of evolution is incorrect or at least physical, chemical, biological, and social written eloquently about their awe and doubtful. They may be skeptical that a sciences and science teachers’ communi- wonder at the history of the universe natural process could account for the ties. It presents the results of a recent ex- and of life on this planet, explaining astonishing diversity of the living world tensive survey of the public acceptance of that they see no conflict between the and the marvelous adaptations of organ- evolution as a function of the level of edu- evidence for evolution and their belief isms to their ways of life. People of faith cation and other variables. The document in God (ref. 1, p. 15; ref. 6). Authorities wonder whether accepting evolution is concludes with a determined call ‘‘for sci- of diverse religious denominations have compatible with their religious beliefs.