Much work still needed to prove evolution
Terry Glavin's article on the research conducted by Rosemary and Peter Grant ["Finches provide the proof," November 15-22] strikes me by its admission that until recently the evolution of the finches on the Galápagos Islands had not been proved. Those who reasonably question Darwin's theory have no problem with what has been called micro-evolution; for example, evolution of the size and shape of the beaks of finches, or of the colour of moths, or of bacteria that have come to resist antibiotics. The issue is not the sort of evolution that has occurred within a species that has adapted to its environment but which remains a finch or a moth–that is, by and large, conceded. The real issue is that of macro-evolution, which involves the claim that inanimate matter and the laws governing it entirely account for the origins of life, and that complex life forms, including the human species, eventually developed by the sole mechanism of random mutation and natural selection. If evolution within the species of finches on the Galápagos Islands has only recently been proved, much more work still needs to be done to prove the far more ambitious theory that posits evolution as an all-encompassing explanation of the origins of life. And, indeed, if the faith of Darwinists were to be vindicated and their ambitious theory were one day proved beyond the shadow of a doubt, questions would still remain as to the origin of the stuff that makes up the universe and of the laws of nature that guided the evolutionary process.
> David Klassen / Vancouver