Criticizing Coynes Theory Of Evolution - Essay Example

Criticizing Coyne’s Theory Of Evolution Jerry A. Coyne in his book ‘Why evolution is true’ tries to justify why evolution is true and begins by first giving the interpretation of the concept of the “theory” saying that its propositions were meant to explain facts about the real world (Coyne, 2009). He further states evolution as fact as opposed to Darwinian which claims to be just a theory which lacks a basis for justification. Coyne takes us through the 9 chapters which he tries to justify his statement. However, in my own understanding he faces several drawbacks and critiques in a bid to justify his position. As far as I am concerned, they way Coyne handled circumstances and occurrences may have been had some contradictions and this is what I intend to point out (Fowler, T. & Kuebler, 2007). In chapter one Coyne, presents his own understanding of evolution, stating the main misunderstanding on scientific approaches to evolution and the issue of theory based on creationist approach (Coyne, 2009).Though he presents several evidence to support his idea, revolution he does not clearly explain the stages of evolution. Again, this theory has raised several controversies as many individuals reject the theory. America’s Discovery Institute resists the theory (Shubin, 2008). Coyne’s explanation of the theory does not cover all the areas such as climatic changes and how it affects the way organisms evolve over time. In my view, climatic changes should affect the way then organisms evolve. Religious movements on their own understanding reject the theory as they believe that God created the world on 6 days and has nothing to do with evolution. He therefore failed to convince the religious leaders. If he was sure of his work, Coyne would have been able to integrate evolution and religion for his ideas to be widely accepted (Shubin, 2008). The way he handles Creationist approach is questionable and puts him in a total mess. To add to the controversy, Coyne considers man as the creator and says that creator would not make organisms. In chapter two, he analyses the evidence to support his theory. He briefly gives the overview of the fossils as evidence of evolution (Coyne, 2009). He further gives the challenges undergone by palaeontologists in a bid to get fossils, strengths and weaknesses of fossil records and the role it plays to justify evolution. Despite the challenges to gather information and data, palaeontologists have done a great work to achieve the best. In contrast, these are presentations of evolutionary arguments and evidence but the issue that brings out questions is the failure to relate fossils evidence and creationist approach (Shubin, 2008). Coyne also overemphasizes on bio geographical things other than creationist approaches. The fact that fossil remains are spread in the world raises a lot of questions and credibility to this theory. In other words, fossils remains in a particular area meaning that evolution only took place in a particular area. He fails to clearly illustrate the reasons why people and other organisms are found in all parts of the world and yet their remains were found in a single area. Coyne seems to have no knowledge on the plate tectonics which has been given an upper hand by creationists. Coyne’s has laid a great deal of importance on mutation in the third chapter. He says about the mutation witnesses of evolution including vestigial organisms (Coyne, 2009).Such poorly designed and useless features provide strong evidence that supports Coyne’s theory. He further provides a good evidence of laryngeal nerve which runs from the throat to the aorta and back again. This chapter also faces some critics. Coyne does not clearly show how evolution and mutation are linked and therefore I would question how vestigial organs come into being and what resulted into their disappearance. Furthermore, mutation is not enough to convince one that evolution occurred. One can as well argue that mutation occurs due to climatic changes in the world and not as a result of evolution (Shubin, 2008). In fact as he defined evolution, he did not mention anything related to mutation and presence of poorly designed and useless features. Creationists claim that the creator created people in His own image and likeness then these organs come from one (Coyne, 2009). This means that if we resemble our creator, then why would he not tell us that creator also evolved? Therefore, his arguments were vague. The next three chapters including 5, 6 and 7 provides the strength of the book and talks about NE ontological arguments from genetics and speciation theory. He discusses about how sex brings about evolution (Shute, 1961). This is a discussion that surprises anyone. It was discovered that sexual combination played a vital role in genetic variability and speciation. According to me, this statement just raises controversies and does not talk about evolution. The first critic is that it is not clear how sex brings about evolution. Though it may result in genetic transfer, evolutionary genes are not transferred. Hence evolutionary genes may not be transferred to another person or organism. This discussion is shallow and cannot really influence my own understanding that sex is a driver of evolution (Shubin, 2008). If this was the case, then we could be seeing diverse evolution in the current world. The second last chapter entails issues pertaining creationist movement that is human evolution. It shows how humans are related to the rest of animal kingdom and how it rose from non-human ancestors. Coyne provides, in this chapter, evidence that shows that man evolved and is connected to the animal kingdom such as the apes (Shubin, 2008). Though this argument is accepted by some creationists, I still unsatisfied and unconvinced with this. Because he does not tell us about the end of evolution then we expect to have evolved from apes to human beings and to other creatures. Why then did we have to stop from this stage? This is the question that Coyne failed to answer. In addition to this critic, this idea of human evolution is not accepted because I believe that we were created by God in his own image and likeness. Religious books also do not have anywhere written about evolution but only provides for the creation days. ‘Evolution Redux’ as he called his final chapter, Coyne provides the overall view on why he said evolution is true. He further voices the implications of evolution from different perspectives. Coyne is such a clever man as seen where he does not provoke creationists directly but lays a framework of supporting ideas and evidence in a bid to convince them that evolution is true. The book is also seen to be persuasive and creationists will hate this book but still feel convinced and tempted to accept (Coyne, 2009). All these chapters have been presented in a convincing manner full of evidences to support the ideas surrounding the burning issue of evolution. This may end up leaving one in a way that finds it difficult to take a stand. Though the book is seen to be convincing, I am still not convinced and courageous enough to take an opposite stand and declare that evolution is not true. He might have struggled to support his statements and ideas but still faces certain challenges worth for me to say evolution is not true. The way Coyne attacks creationism and further his explanations show that he is deficient of certain information that does not justify some statements. He has poor understanding of creationism (Coyne, 2009). From his book, he strongly believes that the earth was created long ago then Africa and South America should be very close together. This clearly shows that he has no knowledge on catastrophic plate tectonics. He then argued that living things occur in the same place where they were created which reflects a poor understanding according to creationists. His weakness further showed that when he talked of vitamin C pseudo gene and yet it does not even require evolutionary explanation. Consequently, we came across many people raising a lot of complaints related to evolution which therefore shows that there is something wrong with this thing called evolution. Coyne was further criticized when he said “Nothing in Biology makes sense except in the light of evolution.” This is refuted by the many achievements and progress in the field of biological sciences that came after the Darwinian revolution (Shubin, 2008). On issues related to coral growth bands, he is not telling the full story in his book. He is seen to have evaded the full explanation which would mean that he has little or no knowledge about it. According to him, origin of life is not part of evolutionary theory and yet he earlier mentioned that lives rose from primitive life form and through steps up to the current life. This with no doubt is evolution and why should he reject it? Chemical evolution states that life began early from non-living chemicals (Shubin, 2008). His definition of vestigial organs as organs with reduced function was vague. He did not define the extent of reduction; instead he would have defined it as functionless organs. This shows that he has failed to show how those organs evolved up to the present. His over-emphasis again in biogeography is criticized (Coyne, 2009). Animals especially those living on land are evenly distributed worldwide. But the problems arise when animals such as marsupials are not distributed throughout the world. In analysing the Biogeography of desert adapted plants, Coyne said that desert plants like cactus are found in the North and South America, while desert adapted ones of Africa and Asia belong to a euphorb family (Coyne, 2009). This to a large extent means that certain plants are meant to grow in certain continents. Coyne was indeed wrong. After a wide range of analyses and understanding of this book, I would like to make a comprehensive conclusion and appreciate the work of Coyne. Coyne again in explaining about natural selection messed up. He said that male lions kill cubs that came up as a result of previous male as this would lead to procreation of killer’s genes to future generation. Now he didn’t tell us about the non-killing species as in the case of human beings. Scientists and evolutionists argue that human female will not agree for a male to murder her children (Shubin 2008). In this scenario therefore shows that Coyne escaped this explanation meaning he might have been aware of the shortcomings. The definition of evolution according to him is not comprehensive. According to my own understanding, this term evolution should cover all aspects of life and how the changes in environment help shape the evolution process. In this book it shows that very few things underwent evolution. What about other things such as non-living organisms? Have they been this way since or they also evolved? These are questions that he ought to have covered and the failure compels me to believe that evolution is not true. According to my own view, Coyne was trying to confuse readers because he didn’t provide sufficient information especially in all the 9 chapters in the book. This trick to some extent makes me doubt even this book (Coyne, 2009). For example, in chapter 1 the definition of evolution is shallow. He goes ahead to use Darwinism to explain evolution. If he was sure of the meaning then why use another person’s theory to explain his theory. On my view, theory qualifies to be the truth after being tested. Coyne’s theory can just be assumptions of how things come into being. No one has conducted a research and proved that this is the true information. The assertion that sex influence evolution is in doubt. I personally cannot understand how evolution is passed from one person to another. What I understand is the genetic transfer but not evolutionary transfer. If that was the case, then why do we appear almost similar to our parents? If evolution took place then we need to have been more complicated than our earlier relatives. He said that evolution is the change over time (Coyne, 2009). He did not specify the exact time meaning that it is an unending changes over time. But we seem not to be evolving further from this stage. Changes that we experience nowadays include environmental, political or even psychological. Now the question that I would ask him given a chance is where the evolutionary changes are. He earlier said that it was an on going process, but we don’t see any evidence of evolution especially in human beings in the twenty first century (Shubin, 2008). The situation before 1990s is described by Coyne as long ago as there were no other reptile-bird intermediates. He hence leaves a vacuum of thoughts between the modern birds and their ancestors (Shubin, 2008). The modern birds must have had their ancestors but Coyne states that there were no bird-reptile intermediates. This is also a section that brings about controversies. Coyne in all his books, there is no any one time that he recognizes the presence of the creator of the universe. He states that the uselessness of the universe as a show of evolution but then says that we can have our own meaning of the universe (Coyne, 2009). He contrarily settles on the meaning of the universe after calling it useless and meaningless. It is also ironical when he begins to discuss about the universe without acknowledging the creator. The technique of explaining evolution from different perspectives to me was meant to convince people to accept his theory of evolution. In fact when you read his book, it appears unique as compared to other books. The tactics that he uses also appear unique. He has tried to gather supportive information and even relevant evidence in an attempt to make creationists accept his unproved theory. I think he was sure of himself he would have presented his theory in just a simple way without using other theories such as Darwinian Theory to further his own theory (Shubin, 2008). Even after his presentation on chapters he still faces opposition from America’s Discovery Institute on indication that he failed to convince them. I wish to conclude this presentation by saying that though Coyne deserves credit for his book, he has faced some critics too. I appreciate the work he has done especially when he outlines the evidences such as fossil remains all over the world to support his statement giving rise to few questions (Shubin, 2008). He has also organized the theory into chapters and in an orderly manner hence it becomes fascinating to the reader. On the other hand, according to me his theory is not sufficient enough to warrant appreciation and acceptance. This is due to critics disputing the fact that evolution is true. To me evolution is not true. We have also seen complaints and controversies from world religious movements especially creationists and publics that are associated with the theory. Many books written by evolutionists have several similarities which have made them monotonous when reading (Coyne, 2009). Most of them base their framework on other one’s work hence gets very little original thinking. Creationism and scientific understanding of this theory varies. But as seen with Coyne, he tries to use evolutionary and scientific theories to justify to creationists that evolution really took place. Therefore, we see that Coyne’s theory of evolution was widely criticized especially in the fact that it undervalues the creator (Shubin, 2009). For this reason therefore, I am not convinced that evolution is true. References Coyne, J. A. (2009). Why evolution is true. New York: Viking. Shubin, N. (2008). Your inner fish: A journey into the 3.5-billion-year history of the human body. New York: Pantheon Books. Read More