The not so intelligent design of evolution

Let the Luddites battle with the scientists among us about evolution vs. Intelligent Design. I say both are losing propositions. If what we have is the best an Intelligent Designer can come up with, we need a better Designer. If what we have is the best that natural selection can come up with, we are all doomed.

Most people with the ability to think have come to the conclusion that there is overwhelming evidence to support the proposition advanced by science that life has evolved over time selecting that iteration of life that best adapts to conditions on earth. But if that is accurate, what can be said about the form of life we humans arrogantly claim to be the penultimate expression of carbon based life forms, human beings?

Is not the human experience a direct refutation of the principles of evolution? Is it not rather clear that we have evolved to the point where we are about to take down not only our own species but most of the rest of life too? Then again, this may point to the genius of evolution.

I point to the explosion of the population of humans In our times, the abundant evidence that we are polluting and exploiting the environment to oblivion and a curious characteristic found most acutely here in the united States. It may well be the Achilles tendon of human existence itself.
Winning. There, I have pointed at the be-all of American existence as the curse of evolution.

Winning is everything, win at all costs, be number one, take no prisoners, skunk the competition, dominate, with us or against us – it has many forms, this pestilence, and is venerated as the unofficial state religion of the United States. Yet, I say it will cost us beyond the worst predictions of the gloomiest doomsayers.

Evolution, it is said, has led to the human condition of competition and its child, winning. We are by nature competitive, it is claimed, and that is a good thing for it leads to all the abundance of goodies which are enjoyed by happy humans. Those without these goodies seek them and if the don’t they are claimed to be either backward or infidels.

When looked at carefully, it is really this clash of religions that lies under the American – Muslim conflict. Many devout Muslims object at the deepest levels to the very nature of our culture – the drive for goods, wealth and the veneration of competition as the evil they fear the most. Our occupation of their lands is an insult, but at bottom they resist with all their energies the invasion of our values.

Yet it is in our own lands that the disease of competition and winning takes its greatest toll. Our young are given little time to develop their natural selves before we train them to be killers, winners and environment devouring idiots. We drive the young to beat their neighbors at everything that comes before them. The values we preach are not about cooperation and community but about what it will take to climb to the top of the heap of bodies left behind.

Capitalism drives business to eat competitors for lunch, to devour employees as just another raw material and aim exclusively at the holy grail of shareholder value. Many demand that government get out of the way of this drive and cease attempts to moderate the impact on our community.

If this is in fact the face of evolution in practice, then evolution is our enemy. It lacks an intelligent design. It is aimed directly at the end of life as we know it and possibly the end of life itself. Yes, that is hyperbole and overly dramatic. But can you refute it?

Humans have developed, as a facet of our evolution, a giant accumulation of specialized cells called a brain. It is time we started using it to dampen down the competition that seeks to destroy us in the name of progress.

It is time we learned how to discuss rather than destroy, accommodate instead of annihilate and cooperate instead of compete. Only then can we claim to have used the fruits of evolution to participate in an intelligent design for evolution on the planet. Only then can we have any claim to being at the top of life’s many forms. Do we have the intelligence to shape evolution itself?

15 Responses to "The not so intelligent design of evolution"

  1. Uncle Ludwig  May 7, 2007 at 12:08 pm

    Survival of the fittest is not about winning, it’s about fitting in to the environmental variables. A more accurate view would be that we’ve become the fullest expression of “fitting in” our species has ever created…Is it any wonder then that so many “sheeple” cannot think their way out of a paper bag?

    What are we asked to fit into these days?

    • Christian Conservatism.
    • Democracy for the World (except here).
    • Fossil Fuels Forever!
    • Lower Taxes (instead of scrutiny on spending).
    • Personal accountability (for everybody else but me)
    • We can’t afford to take care of our own (and $$$ repre$ent$ the only TRUE mea$urement in our $ociety).
    • Medical practices based on invasive or drug-based treatments, and drug-company influence in the medical industry.
    • Success as measured in the amount of money acquired (what older cultures have always attributed being favored by God”, btw.)
    • Success as measured by how outrageous one can be in public (e.g. “celeb-utards”)
    • The President is not to be questioned about anything. He’s the decider guy.
    • The “other guy” is the danger to our “way of life.”

    The days of the balanced, straight-and-narrow path are doomed, as are probably the days of the human race. Viva la cucaracha!

  2. jcapbluec  May 7, 2007 at 12:24 pm

    JblueC

    Evolutionists BUILD us a living cell.

    If evolutionists want to end the arguments all they need do is, get their brilliant heads together and assemble a ‘simple’ living cell. This should be possible, because today they certainly have a very great amount of knowledge about the contents of the so-called ‘simple’ cell.

    After all, shouldn’t all the combined Intelligence of all the worlds scientist be able the do what chance encounters with random chemicals, without a set of instructions, accomplished about 4 billion years ago, ‘according to the evolutionists,’ and having no intelligence at all available to help them along in their quest to become a living entity. Surely the evolutionists scientists of today should be able to make us a ‘simple’ cell.

    If it weren’t so pitiful it would be humorous, that intelligent people have swallowed the evolution mythology.

    Beyond doubt, the main reason people believe in evolution is that sources they admire, say it is so. It would pay for these people to do a thorough examination of all the evidence CONTRARY to evolution that is readily available: Try answersingenesis.org. The evolutionists should honestly examine the SUPPOSED evidence ‘FOR’ evolution for THEMSELVES.

    Build us a cell, from scratch, with the required raw material, that is with NO cell material, just the ‘raw’ stuff, and the argument is over. But if the scientists are unsuccessful, perhaps they should try Mother Earth’s recipe, you know, the one they claim worked the first time about 4 billion years ago, so they say. All they need to do is to gather all the chemicals that we know are essential for life, pour them into a large clay pot and stir vigorously for a few billion years, and Walla, LIFE!

    Oh, you don’t believe the ‘original’ Mother Earth recipe will work? You are NOT alone, Neither do I, and MILLIONS of others!

  3. Steve Horn  May 7, 2007 at 1:23 pm

    If you don’t buy into natural selection and/or evolution, how do you explain the differences (some major, some minor) between species and sub-species?

    And – if you believe that “God” created man in his own image – let me ask you – WHICH man did “He” create in “His” image – last time I looked we all looke just a bit different from each other …. or is it that for those who “believe” that this God created THEM in HIS own image?

    As for the decline of our species – that’s a natural part of evolution – after all – neandertals were replaced by modern humans – seen any T-Rex walking through the park? How about saber toothed tigers in Orange County CA ?

    Species come, species go – it’s getting more obvious every day – we’re just an evolutionary branch that didn’t work real well …

    Peace

    Steve

  4. Sandy Price  May 7, 2007 at 3:14 pm

    and the scientists are pushing for humans to live on the moon and then mars. They claim we have to move on to space. That is the most exciting thing I ever heard. Even if we go in our current level of development we will evolve to survive in all those wonderful places.

    I read a lot of sci fi in my youth and had dreams of Venus. I wonder if we will get any smarter? The Scientists say we will be on Venus in 50 years and Mars in 10. I won’t live that long and count on you youngsters to “get it done!”

  5. Doubtom  May 8, 2007 at 12:59 am

    on the same day you introduce me to your intelligent designer.

    You find it pitiful if not humorous that people have swallowed the evolution theory, while I find it incredibly pathetic that you’ve swallowed your ‘captain in the sky’ myth.

  6. Elmo  May 8, 2007 at 10:03 am

    Evolution doesn’t claim that what has evolved is “good”, only that it worked well enough to be better than the competition. In the long run, it isn’t about you surviving, it’s about your children and their children and their children surviving. Any break in the chain and you’re out of the gene pool even if the chain breaks 200 or 2000 years down the road. So the fact that we’re in the process of using up our resources like a $20 whore and our descendants may not survive doesn’t refute any of the principles of Natural Selection, it demonstrates that they work as advertised. Something else will step in when we’re gone.

  7. Rob Kezelis  May 5, 2007 at 7:30 pm

    a thought provoking post.

  8. f33dback  May 6, 2007 at 12:42 am

    Nothing last forever.

  9. SEAL  May 6, 2007 at 1:45 am

    If we choose to believe in evolution, some thing or some one threw a wrench in works and altered it because the human race is not in balance with the rest of it. If that’s true, there certainly was no “intelligence” in the design.

  10. Ardie  May 6, 2007 at 10:17 am

    I may have discovered what is standing in the way of evolution! It was the result of a study funded by the US government that concluded conservatism can be explained psychologically as a set of neuroses rooted in “fear and aggression, dogmatism and the intolerance of ambiguity” (The Guardian, 8/13/03 Julian Borger ). Just eliminate the conservatives and evolution gets back on track. (Geez, have you really looked at Fred Thompson–he looks like a Neanderthal.)

  11. Sandy Price  May 6, 2007 at 11:07 am

    The problem is having politicians try to force their ideas into the Constitution and federal laws. The Constitution used to be our federal laws but it is almost impossible to keep them in the same sentence. We must get the religious right out of our federal laws but it would mean teaching American values in our schools. Do we remember what they are?

  12. SEAL  May 6, 2007 at 9:31 pm

    The first thing the repugnants did when they took over in 92 was eliminate the teaching of the constitution in our schools. My first three kids went through school before that so, I only had to add what was behind the construction of it for them. But my last son who was 15 years later had no class that taught the constitution. I taught him myself. He says his friends know nothing about it. That is a crime. Our education system should be prosecuted for it.

    But they want prayer in the schools, don’t they? I guess when you don’t know what the constitution says, the only thing left to do is pray.

  13. Paul Cawthorne  May 7, 2007 at 9:56 am

    Having just had a little “plumbing” surgery, might I suggest that the location of the prostate gland is a powerful argument against intelligent design?

  14. Sandy Price  May 7, 2007 at 10:03 am

    Let’s talk about women’s periods and somebody tell me that God didn’t have a rotten sense of humor.

  15. Doubtom  May 7, 2007 at 11:45 am

    There seems to be a “surge” (used guardedly)of good books, not to be confused with the ONE good book, attempting to clarify the question of intelligent design and even of the existence of the intelligent designer himself.
    I speak of Richard Dawkins’s book “The God Delusion” and the more recent “god is not great” by Christopher Hitchens. May these two courageous authors represent the vanguard of a new period of enlightenment that will finally wean us from the childish attachment to myths, that have so effectively imprisoned the human mind.

Comments are closed.