I have enjoyed healthy debates with certain evolutionist friends who have stopped by to try and argue their way out of wet paper sacks. I happened across this article at Jason G’s blog and thought I would would give it some more life here since perhaps my friends haven’t seen it or haven’t visited Jason G’s blog. This is a short article by Freeman Dyson (Freeman Dyson is professor emeritus of physics at the Institute for Advanced Study, Princeton where his research has focused on the internal physics of stars, subatomic-particle beams and the origin of life.–from NPQ) and was posted on July 23, 2007 at New Perspectives Quarterly online.
Dyson wrote, in part:
Now, after some 3 billion years, the Darwinian era is over. The epoch of species competition came to an end about 10,000 years ago when a single species, Homo sapiens, began to dominate and reorganize the biosphere. Since that time, cultural evolution has replaced biological evolution as the driving force of change. Cultural evolution is not Darwinian. Cultures spread by horizontal transfer of ideas more than by genetic inheritance. Cultural evolution is running a thousand times faster than Darwinian evolution, taking us into a new era of cultural interdependence that we call globalization. And now, in the last 30 years, Homo sapiens has revived the ancient pre-Darwinian practice of horizontal gene transfer, moving genes easily from microbes to plants and animals, blurring the boundaries between species. We are moving rapidly into the post-Darwinian era, when species will no longer exist, and the evolution of life will again be communal.
Jason G quips: “How’s this for a vision of the future? Will we still be able to get the old varieties of roses and orchids … ?”
I think the best question in the essay is, “When did Darwinian Evolution begin?” which is actually a question posed by Carl Woese (of whom I have no information save for that which Dyson divulges). It is an interesting article. Again, like those bones we talked about in another post, I don’t know (nor do I think it does) if it means anything. I think it is an example of another evolutionist grasping as straws, gasping for some hope to come out of an otherwise hopeless, meaningless proposition. In short, it is a fine example of futility. But read the entire essay, it is easy enough to understand. Don’t make too much of it. It means nothing to those who reject Darwinism as a valid intellectual pursuit.
It is a grasp, a gasp. It is the horror of knowing that your life is, essentially, meaningless. I agree with Jason: “How’s this for a future?”
PS–Thanks to Jason G at PT Forsyth Files for originally posting the link to this essay.