left biblioblography: Evolutionary Tract (Redux)

Monday, April 02, 2007

Evolutionary Tract (Redux)

I thank everyone for their encouragements, critiques, and suggestions on this - and the final draft is available on my Google account.

I have also received suggestions that I didn't take, not to mention a touch of flack as to the wording.

So let's recap:

  1. Yeah, yeah, I know that Intelligent Design isn't a philosophy: it's nothing more than a PR machine: yes, I do know that it's Paley's Watchmaker re-framed. Anyone familiar with my writings knows this, so gimmee a break, willya? This was an effort to be gracious: we're trying to keep it out of the science classrooms. What it does elsewhere isn't really the pivotal concern.
  2. Yes, philosophy and science are in a symbiotic relationship of sorts: but the average Joe Schmoe doesn't know this, does he? (or Joann Schmoe, if you're gonna give me grief on the PC thing.) The point is, that they're usually taught in separate classes in the middle- to high-school levels, are they not? That can wait till college. What kids are learning is fundamentals. Basic cornerstones. Mixing and matching can wait.
  3. Yes, there are philosophers that make a living at philosophy: I'm not slamming them, or trying to infer some pejorative about the field. Pick ten random people on the street, and ask them for a list of ten philosophers. I'm betting that most'll fum-fah, or have no answer. Maybe one will mention Socrates. Yeah, it sucks: yeah, it means our educational system is deficient. The whole point of this tract is to appeal to Everyman.
  4. I received some suggestions about points we argue over here on the blogosphere - I glossed over them because

A. I want to keep it simple,

B. I'm operating on the premise that most of said readers haven't a clue about the ongoing debate outside a vague mention on the news,

C. I'm trying to keep it down to one page, and

D. Being overly pedantic will simply suck the life right out of it.

I'm still open to constructive criticism: just please bear in mind that this is aimed at a specific demographic, one that is probably severely uninformed as to the controversy of the subject. Talking points that we're achingly familiar with are likely completely foreign to the uninformed.

Anyways, here it is:

Whether or not you as an individual appreciate or agree, or have philosophical or religious reservations over the theory of evolution – the fact remains: it’s a reality, and no amount of dispute or debate can change that.

Here are the FACTS about this so-called ‘theory’:

DID YOU KNOW - That evolution is a science, that deals with categorizations based on observation - that it is not a philosophy, religion, dogma or doctrine?

DID YOU KNOW – That evolution is the backbone of modern biology?

DID YOU KNOW – That prior to Darwin’s Origin of the Species, one hundred percent of the scientists in the 19th century believed in the creation theory – in the 21st century, it is now one percent?

DID YOU KNOW – Without this ‘theory’, we wouldn’t have the benefit of modern medicine: items such as antibiotics, flu shots, or a multitude of other life-saving procedures? That the constant evolution of flu viruses is why there are new flu shots every year?

DID YOU KNOW – Most modern agriculture relies heavily on evolutionary ‘theory’? This includes crops as well as animal husbandry.

DID YOU KNOW – That the ‘failure of evolutionary theory’ has been incorrectly predicted as far back as 1871?

DID YOU KNOW – That without evolutionary ‘theory’, most forensic labs would be unable to function? That’s right – forensic criminologists would be unable to do things like rebuild the bodies of victims, or use DNA to tell suspects apart.

DID YOU KNOW – That evolution has had a widespread, positive impact on our quality of life, longevity, health, as well as leading to a better understanding of the world around us?

DID YOU KNOW – That Pope John Paul II recognized the theory as correct science in 1996?

The concept of INTELLIGENT DESIGN is a fine philosophy – that is for people to decide for themselves. But a philosophy is just that – only philosophy. Science deals with facts, with reality, with the measurable impact on our daily lives. And until this philosophy contributes measurably to the way we live our lives, it must and should remain in a philosophy class, not in a scientific lab or classroom.

Because philosophy doesn’t save lives. It doesn’t vaccinate our children against the flu, or teach the surgeon to wield a scalpel. It doesn’t lead us to the perpetrator of a heinous crime, or protect our children from the ravages of disease.

Science does.

Science is not something we vote on - if it works, it works, and no amount of argument can change that.

For more information visit the following website's:






I'm all up for a neat graphic, but for the life of me, can't seem to find (or think of) one that's appropriate.

Stumble Upon Toolbar


BEAJ said...

I don't like the Pope one. It reminds me too much of anti-evolutionists who quote scientists and use these out of context quotes to try to make a case.

Krystalline Apostate said...

BEAJ - Well, I think it needs a reference to at least one major religious figure.

Sadie Lou said...

I've been watching these Atheist 101 short movies on cyberkitten's blog (He's an atheist). Atheists *LOVE* to quote Catholics and point to the Catholic church as a representation of Christianity as a whole--it just gets old. They're an easy target.

Krystalline Apostate said...

sadie - well, I put the Pope in as a positive point.
You have to remember, that the Holy See's been the rep for xtianity for a long, LONG time. Even post-Reformation.
They're an easy target because they're 1 BIG ass target (pardon my french).

Krystalline Apostate said...

Oh, sadie? Which video criticizes the RC?

Sadie Lou said...

Here's a link to cyberkitten's YouTube videos called "Atheism 101". They don't always site the RC but they often do.

The Pope quote was positive? I'll have to go back and read it again--it's been awhile since I read it on your last post.

Krystalline Apostate said...

sadie - I meant which 101 video. I was over there yesterday, & I was hoping I could just look at 1.
That's okay.
Well, the Pope quote wasn't negative, in draft 1 or here.

Sadie Lou said...

I'm sorry. I meant to communicate that the first time I read it was awhile ago and I just assumed it was negative--couldn't remember if it was or wasn't. My bad. I'll try to pinpoint which 101 clip it was from. I remember I posted to cyberkitten a couple times over it.
Just so you know, your blog isn't loading all the way. It's been this way for awhile now.

Sadie Lou said...

It was Atheism 101 Part 4

Krystalline Apostate said...

sadie - hey, no harm no foul. ;)
My blog's not loading all the way? Whaaaa? How is it not loading? Can you give me some ideas please?

karen said...

Blog's loading fine for me, KA. Just taking the usual extra time on dialup. You should see how long it takes to load beepbeep's and BEAJ's
blogs-which is why I don't go there so much. Plus, last time I was at BEAJ's there was no *other* option for commenting. You had to have a blog>

karen said...

Blog's loading fine for me, KA.

Krystalline Apostate said...

That's 4 comments - you SURE it's loading okay? ;)
I was wondering if the blog loading is impacting the feedburner counts (they jump up 1 week, go down the next). Hmmmm.

Sadie Lou said...

It loaded fine this morning but yestareday and the couple of days before that, the backround part of your blog wouldn't load--it just stalled. All I could see was the print of your posts against the dark brown pattern--so I couldn't even read it.
But it's fine this morning. Weird.

karen said...

Did I send 4 comments?
I sent the second short one, cos I thought the first one got lost. I was cornfoosed by the comment moderation
being enabled.

Krystalline Apostate said...

sadie - so that was a 1 time hiccup?

karen - yeah, I only let 2 thru though. I figured it was your dial-up, babe.

Sadie Lou said...

Must be. It's fine now. Did you ever take me up on my challenge and post any comments on internetmonk's site or Pietyhill Press?

Krystalline Apostate said...

sadie - no, not yet. Maybe next week, as I'm a little distracted.

Zac Hunter said...

I like this version. I think it was more of a wording thing I was nitpicking. And like I said before, I was only nitpicking. Its a fine piece of work. I understand it is directed at the everyman. In that regard it is effective. If I remember the old version correctly, it looks like you added a definite article 'this' before the term 'philosophy' a few times to emphasize 'this philosophy' (ID) in particular. That did all the work for me :)

I am going to try and print some up today before I head to Los Angeles for the weekend. I always get bombarded by scientologists and evangelicals down there. I love handing stuff back to these religious nuts, like my FFRF tracts.

Zac Hunter said...

I love how I misused an indefinite article right before I held forth on the wonders of the word 'this'

Silly me. My High School English teacher is rolling in his grave I am sure. I need more coffee today.

Good Job KA. Its things like this that really help make the difference in the meme war (the tract I mean, not the grammar choices...or is it??)

Zac Hunter said...

The last suggestion I have is to find a way tro format them so they are easily printed onto a single sheet or even an 11 x 17" that someone could chop up in multiples. Then I could print them on groovy yellow paper and start folding them up and putting them all over SF.

Think of me as your personal 'Street Team'

I am working on a foldable version during office down time now. I will let you know if I come up with something.


Krystalline Apostate said...

Zac - Cool deal!
I fiddled w/PDF format, but Google Docs doesn't accept it.
When I posted the redux version, WLW updated the 'old' version - D'oh! & that rarest of events occurred: didn't have the original on the hard drive.
Must be gettin' old. I'm usually so pedantic about that sorta thing. Oh well.
Thanks, mein freund.

Zac Hunter said...

OK, so right now, I am working on a bookfold format 11x17" I can print two per page and cut it in half, fold it in thirds and its good to go. If I get a little graphic for the back side, I can fold that on top as a cover. Voila! Maybe the AA symbol? Or, I was thinking just a magnifying glass as a symbol for empiricism.

I wish I was more proficient with Word. I am going to try and get it to work in illustrator. If my boss isn't watching too close, I will have some of these babies on the street tonight.

Carlie said...

Love it! I'm going to print some!