We have now posted in full Casey Luskin’s series on “The Top Ten Scientific Problems with Biological and Chemical Evolution.” It was earlier published in serial form here at Evolution News & Views. What would Adam Gopnik at The New Yorker say if he actually sat down and read such a document?
Mr. Gopnik wrote the other day to endorse the idea of subjecting national office-seekers to an evolutionary catechism. He finds it telling that some leading Republicans have declined to say whether they believe in Darwinian theory. Gopnik regards answering such a question as a test of character:
Do you have the courage to embrace an inarguable and obvious truth when it might cost you something to do so? A politician who fails this test is not high-minded or neutral; he or she is just craven, and shouldn’t be trusted with power.
While this is stated in extreme terms, and while the premise is false — that evolution is “an inarguable and obvious truth” — I’m sympathetic to the basic point that someone who wants to be President of the United States shouldn’t be congratulated for “punting” on evolution. Biological origins is an ultimate question demanding consideration, a serious weighing of the evidence, from any thoughtful person.
That said, Gopnik shouldn’t be allowed to get away with chastising anyone on the basis of his own — that is, Adam Gopnik’s — ignorance.