I‚Äôll make this very simple. I‚Äôm done mincing words, tip-toeing around feelings and devotions, and using any tact whatsoever. If you don‚Äôt believe in evolution you are a misinformed idiot.
Recently, while sitting behind a car emblazoned with a ‚Äútruth‚Äù fish eating the ‚ÄúDarwin‚Äù legged fish, I realized an irony. In decrying evolution the emblem was supporting evolution‚Äôs central tenet; that fit things will outlast unfit things.
The American Museum of Natural History in New York City opened a wonderful new exhibit last week. Entitled [‚ÄúDarwin,‚Äù](http://www.amnh.org/exhibitions/darwin/?src=e_h) the exhibit represents the largest, most personal, and most complete collection of items related to Darwin‚Äôs life and work on the theory of evolution. Hopefully, I will be able to see it before it leaves the States.
However, in another demonstration of a movement that has become a national shame and made us the target of jibes and jests from around the world, corporations refused to sponsor the exhibit due to pressure from intelligent design advocates. [This article](http://news.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2005/11/20/wdarwin20.xml) from London‚Äôs Telegraph Journal perfectly conveys the tone of disdain with which the rest of the civilized world views America‚Äôs continual kowtowing to creationists.
>The failure of American companies to back what until recently would have been considered a mainstream educational exhibition reflects the growing influence of fundamentalist Christians, who are among President George W Bush’s most vocal supporters, over all walks of life in the United States.
The article goes on to discuss the alarmingly high rates of creationists in the US ‚Äì numbers I‚Äôve seen vary from between 45%-60% and, according to the article, currently sits at 51%.
If I had the resources and the time I could demonstrate evolution right now, right in front of your eyes. With a syringe of antibiotics, a Petri dish of bacteria and a microscope we could watch the evolution of resistant strains of bacteria. This evidence is as irrefutable as can be. Creationists, who have no recourse but to accept this fact, cite such demonstrations as proof of ‚Äúmicro-evolution‚Äù and counter with the assertion that such demonstrations do not prove the existence of ‚Äúmacro-evolution‚Äù or ‚Äúinter-species‚Äù evolution between more complex animals.
The non-existence of ‚Äúinter-species‚Äù evolution is an often used creationist rebuttal. What is perplexing about this argument is its insistence that human taxonomical categories of animals are, in some way, real categories that represent actual divisions amongst animals rather than a conveniently created way of dividing up a continuum. A horse and a zebra are different species because we say they are and for no other reason. Likewise, a Chihuahua and a Great Dane are the same species because we say they are. In the future, if a type of zebra develops that has significantly varied traits we may decide to call it another species, we may not. Either way, the ultimate arbiter of whether or not ‚Äúinter-species‚Äù evolution has occurred is our taxonomy.
All of this evidence, however (and there is an astronomical amount of it), fails to do one thing: It fails to prove, that is empirically prove, that evolution happened ‚Äì that is, happened in the past. This is simply due to the fact that we cannot empirically prove, in a conventional scientific manner, that anything happened in the past. Proving that the Earth currently revolves around the sun does not prove that it revolved around the sun on August 23, 1554, or even yesterday. Historical sciences all suffer from this problem. In the end, this ‚Äúloophole‚Äù is all that the creationists have to rely on.
But, this is not meant to be a run-down of the arguments for evolution ‚Äì just a small, pseudo-rant. So many [books](http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0060958502/102-9046951-1984965) have argued for evolution far better than I could ever could.
The intelligent design movement will continue to fester for many years until, just like heliocentrism, Christianity will be forced to adapt. Another trait of evolution; those things that can adapt will also outlast those that are unadaptable. But, by no means will this destroy Christianity. The quicker Christians realize this, the better for our laughing-stock nation and the children of Kansas.