Today is February 12, 2009. Charles Darwin would have been 200 years old today had not the "Survival of the Fittest" come to bite him in the butt. You see freakishly old people aren't good for the gene pool and therefore must die. Happy birthday, Mr. Darwin. (I really don't think he was all that surprised, the man was a theologian after all.)
There is a lot going on on campus today in honor of this man and his achievements. I am tempted to be sitting in on them to be perfectly honest, to try to understand. Because I don't understand. I get survival of the fittest. You are stronger than that guy and you have to fight him for food. "That guy" loses and you get to eat. Congratulations to you. But that is where my understanding runs out.
In class on Tuesday my professor mentioned a man who believes we have eradicated "survival of the fittest" in this day and age because of medication, proper nutrition, mass production of food. Of course the second you begin arguing this case you discover different members of the "fittest" class - so long as you have money, live in the right country, have skills for the right job, etc., etc. But then apparently I'm going to die from a common form of melanoma and not contribute my freakishly pale skin to the gene pool. Of course that thought ticks me off because pale people can be smart and take precautions and stay alive a little longer than some may predict. Just like women can have babies that are over 7 pounds without a C-section (my mom had 5 such babies). So apparently I'm a double miracle: I was a big baby and I've lived to be sunburned more than once. Look out, Darwin, I might just have the firepower to prove you wrong.
I don't remember if I blogged on my realization that the advancement of the intelligence of man has created an environment where a small, very small, portion of our population is BRILLIANT which allows the majority to be morons with little to no morals and absolutely no self-control. Not saying that we are all members of the moronic class, of course, but the brilliantly minded individuals are allowing for that to occur, if you will. You see if survival of the fittest were truly working we wouldn't create cars that won't start if your blood alcohol level is too high, drunk people wouldn't survive crashes while the mom and her kid in the other car bleed to death on the side of the road. So perhaps survival of the fittest still exists but is flawed due to our advancement of technology. The rich get to survive, the drunk get to survive, liars and thieves...but if you're a brown moth in a forest of aspens, look out!
That is merely one example born of my prof telling us about those cars. I've already mentioned my sheep theory in an earlier post. Ever wonder about survival of the fittest and Noah? Hm...
Don't get me started on the conveniently missing "missing link" or the fact that fish evolved to have gills but whales still need air? Why did they get jipped? The really scary thing is that I'm not intelligent enough or schooled enough to back up my rantings. I want to learn, I want to be able to sit down with someone and have a logical conversation about all of this, but I don't think they listen to themselves. It doesn't make any sense! The man presenting his paper this morning that I heard during my class said something about gills evolving and whales "adapting" themselves for an aquatic environment where we did not. Why did they stop where they did? Why didn't they develop gills too? And he was talking about random selection and common ancestors, clades and grades and biological evolutionists trying to be heard by the common man. Apparently theists that are also evolutionists are losing their footing on both grounds - people aren't taking God seriously and they aren't taking evolution seriously.
The first time I've ever heard the words "who's Darwin" was yesterday from the mouth of a 14 year old. So apparently they don't have the hold on the future that I thought they did. I don't want to discount people simply because they tell me we evolved from apes, feeling fully confident in their claims because of Lucy, the skeleton they found (well they found 40% of her anyway) that proves we started walking upright before our brains got so big. I want to enter into intelligent conversation with them. Problem is neither of us will listen to each other. Thing is though, that like I said earlier, they don't listen to themselves! Neanderthal infants had brains the size of modern infants. So they got dumber as they got older? What?
My professor believes in God on Saturday and Sunday. He says that science eventually runs out of ways to explain what we see in the world and we need the supernatural. Fact of the matter is my God has nothing to fear from science. Why does science believe it has so much to fear from a God that set all this wonderfulness in motion? Why is he just an afterthought for some and non-existant for others? I think the majority of the population isn't sure what they believe about evolution. They learn it in school and they move on. Sad thing is the same can be said of people and their belief in God (only they don't get to learn it in school). So maybe I have more in common with an evolutionist than I thought - neither of us can get people to listen to what we believe to be absolute truth and believe it.
Thankfully for me God does the majority of the work. I just need to be faithful and keep learning and professing. I need to keep learning about Him, and I need to keep learning about where the world is at. If I'm not informed how can I expect other people to be? I can't afford to "check my brain at the door" no matter how much faith I have (and praise be to God my "I just don't get it" bug doesn't affect my belief in Him). Thanks, Leah, for helping me re-realize that; I'm praying for you. God gave me faith and He gave me intelligence. I need to make sure I exercise both.
So happy birthday, Mr. Darwin. Thanks for the challenge.