What is a study of RELIGION VS. DARWINISM?
NeoDarwinism is based upon the assumption that evolutionary novelty is the result of "natural selection" doing something (???) to random genetic errors. That would not be consistent with any religion I’ve heard of. On the other hand if evolution is assumed to result from an organism’s purposeful adaptation to the environment, a deity may or may not be involved. That is ok with most agnostics. However most atheists can’t tolerate anything that even permits the possibility of a deity, and RM&NS is the only evolutionary theory completely devoid of intelligence or purpose that anyone can think of to explains evolutionary novelty.
A Few Impertinent Questions about Autism, Freudianism and Materialism
http://30145.myauthorsite.com/
First, “Darwinism” is a term that creationists use to imply that evolutionary biology follows Darwin and his original theory blindly (religiously?), and to imply that there have been no advances in the study of evolutionary biology since Darwin’s time. This is, of course, completely untrue. Biologists are not disciples and do not “follow” Darwin in the way that religious people follow a religious figure. As I saw one contributor to Yahoo Answers once say, I have access to far more information about evolution than Darwin ever did, simply because the science has advanced that far in the 150 years since the publication of Origin of Species. There is no such thing as a Darwinist, much less a Neo-Darwinist, except in the biased mind of the creationist. It’s a dishonest term, used dishonestly specifically to support a misleading impression. Second, evolution is not a hypothesis. It is both a fact and a well-documented scientific theory. Scientific theories are not guesses or hunches or conje
