I am a very ardent student of the sciences, so people get confused to learn I do not believe in neo-Darwinian evolution. I am also not religious and I do not believe in biblical creationism.
When I look at evolution, I see a fragile belief system. A religion with its own priests and followers that use ridicule and shame to chastise any that refuse to “believe”. This is not how science is supposed to operate.
Natural selection is not evolution, but in American schools it is taught as a proof of evolution. This is the first mistake. NS is a process where organisms are influenced in development by their environment. It does not and can not speak to the origin of the organism itself. It is no proof therefore, of evolution as a theory of origins, but solely a method by which pre-existing organisms can change, and that change has been shown to be severely limited.
Darwin wrote in Origin of Species, “If it could be demonstrated that any complex organ existed which could not possibly have been formed by numerous, successive slight modifications, my theory would absolutely break down.”
With that in mind, watch the following video, and allow yourself to be intellectually honest. You don’t have to respond with a comment. Just think about things. How did the growth of a human being over 9 months in the womb arise from “numerous, successive slight modifications.” An honest man will have no choice but to doubt that. And his doubt is supported by the science of the mathematics of chance, and by the continuing depth of biological research.
Somehow we got here, but it wasn’t from goo to you via the zoo.
Now Dawkins wrote: “Biology is the study of complicated things that give the appearance of having been designed for a purpose.” Dawkins then argues that the appearance is merely an illusion. I argue it is not. The universe from top to bottom appears to be designed, because clearly it was. Not knowing who or what that designer is, creates metaphysical implications. And that can never be an excuse for the continued pursuit of simply following the evidence where it leads.