fill in the blanks

Gerald Schroeder makes the point that to the debate concerning intelligent design in America is not necessary. He says rather than arguing about how and if a “fish became a frog,” teachers ought to simply focus on the wonders of the natural world. “Young people are smart enough to fill in the blanks of the metaphysical significance,” is how Schroeder put it.

The majority of science teachers in our schools are totally Darwinian evolutionists in their thinking. One would have to make the assumption that they would desire to highlight the utter complexity of the physical universe in all its macro and micro levels. Yes, students would fill in the blanks, but are they getting blanks to fill?

For example, when I speak to high school students in various parts of the country, about the “Cambrian explosion,” where virtually all the body plans for animal life appear suddenly about 530 million years ago, only a few hands go up in any audience. Think about it. Prior to this time in the history of life on earth, there is only evidence of some bacteria, plankton, and algae, then, wham, almost all the architectural structures for animal life at once? Is that a little unsettling?

Yes, unsettling to a Darwinian model of slow, gradual, infinitesimal change over vast periods of time for evolution. The Cambrian explosion has huge implications for a classic Darwinian model. There are evolutionary explanations for how this may have occurred, but there is no agreement on this, whatsoever. There is a lively debate going on in biology about these Cambrian events at this very moment, but it doesn’t appear to even be mentioned in many of our classrooms.

Why?

More tomorrow.