A Critique of the Evolution Theory From Gaudiya-Vaisnavism

A Critique of the Evolution

Theory From Gauòéya-Vaiñëavism

By Rabin Bangoer

1. Introduction

Evolutionists and religionists generally do not like each other. In my practice of Gauòéya-Vaiñëavism and with my background as a scientist, I have experienced prejudice, misconceptions, and ridicule from both sides. Religionists condemn the atheistic nature of the evolution theory. Evolutionists find the idea that God created life primitive and naive, or they cannot get a hold on it. This situation is not conducive for a dialogue.

By writing this essay I wished to get a better understanding of the evolution theory and what the Gauòéya-Vaiñëava view on this theory is. I wanted to find out whether there is any possibility of the two becoming more united.

Gauòéya-Vaiñëavism is a devotional, theistic tradition based on the holy (Vedic) scriptures of India. It teaches that God is ultimately a person and that the goal of life is to reestablish our loving relationship with Him.

The glossary at the end of this paper explains some technical terms and Sanskrit words.

2. The Evolution Theory

The evolution theory is a very complex system of mechanisms and views. To make it more comprehensible I approach it from different points of view: how did it develop; what kind of evidence is there; what are the problems?

2.1 Development

The evolution theory was founded by Charles Darwin (1809-1882). Barbour (1998, 52-53) and McGrath (1999, 188-189) describe how he came to this theory. Some elements of the theory had already been formulated by others: the 'struggle for survival' and the variations of species. (Barbour, 50). Darwin got the idea of selection by studying the 'artificial selection' of animal breeders. (McGrath, 157). He got the notion of 'struggle for survival' from Malthus's population theory. (Barbour, 52).

During a five-year journey around the world Darwin noticed that species living on different islands showed anatomical variations and that favorable variations enabled organisms to survive longer. Thus these variations were better conserved than unfavorable ones. Darwin called this principle 'natural selection.' He believed that he had found the mechanism for the development of new species.

In 1859 Darwin published On the Origin of Species, after having collected a huge amount of experimental data for twenty-seven years. In 1871 he published The Descent of Man, which described the evolution of humans.

According to Darwin's evolution theory, species undergo 'random variations' and natural selection. Some variations equip organisms to better face the environment or compete with other populations (the 'struggle for survival'). Better-adapted organisms have more chances to survive and reproduce, and weaker ones die out ('survival of the fittest'). Over a long period this causes species to change.

In the twentieth century many new theories emerged: population theory, information theory, and system theory. (Barbour, 221). The discovery of DNA gave rise to molecular biology, which includes genetics and heredity. These new developments impacted the evolution theory. The elimination of God from science made the evolution theory atheistic. The result of all these modifications is known as 'Neo-Darwinism' or 'the Modern Synthesis.' (Barbour, 222).

Barbour (221-223) describes characteristics of the Modern Synthesis. Variation of species is now considered to be caused by genetic mutations (for example, by X-rays or chemicals) and recombination. According to population theory, a species is united by its reproductive habits, not by morphological similarity; there can be much variation within a species. The principle of natural selection has been expanded with additional mechanisms:

(i) 'symbiosis' - cooperation between species;

(ii) 'differential reproduction' - the dominance of a mutated gene depends on how many descendants the organism produces;

(iii) 'division of labor' - organisms in a population carry out their own specific tasks (like in a termite population);

(iv) 'selective behavior of organisms' - for example, birds looking under the bark of trees;

(v) 'internal behaviour with purpose' - random mutations are not always the cause of change, but they carry the initiatives of the organism (like instinct, learning, or curiosity).

According to Barbour (223-225) there are also discussions to expand the Modern

Synthesis:

(i) 'punctuated equilibrium' - the development of new species happens suddenly, in bursts, not gradually;

(ii) 'non-adaptive changes' - not every change is induced by external selection or is useful, some changes are side effects of others;

(iii) 'genetic drift' - in small populations, random changes in gene frequency can lead to the conservation or elimination of a property;

(iv) the mechanism of selection operates at different levels: individual organisms, 'kinship groups' (groups with shared genes and social, interdependent behavior),

or whole species (a species behaves like a organism but on a larger time scale);

(v) 'active role of the genes' - genes do not always passively undergo mutations, they can also change by 'transposition' (rearrangement on the DNA string), or by interaction with enzymes that react to signals from the environment (like in the immune system).

Developments in information theory and systems theory explain that there can be both chance and direction in evolution when it includes the following elements (Barbour, 227-230):

(i) a hierarchy of levels - nature consists of atoms, molecules, genes, cells, organs, organisms, populations, and species;

(ii) information exchange between and within the levels - DNA and the surrounding cytoplasm exchange information through proteins;

(iii) restrictions on the information exchange between different levels - the cytoplasm puts restrictions on the possibilities of DNA mutations;

(iv) chance - random mutations of DNA.

The Encyclopedia Britannica (Hoiberg et al. 2002, evolution theory) summarizes the evolution theory in three concepts:

(i) 'common descent' - all organisms have descended from a common source;

(ii) history and details of 'speciation' - when and how have new species developed;

(iii) mechanisms of speciation

According to the Britannica, the concept of common descent has been 'accepted by virtually every biologist.' The history, details, and mechanisms of evolution are 'matters of active scientific investigation.'

2.2 Evidence

The Britannica article gives evidence from the following areas, for which the evolution theory provides an adequate explanation.

(i) 'The fossil record'

Fossil evidence has become 'considerably stronger and comprehensive' because of developments in the twentieth century. When an organism dies parts, of the body are conserved in the mud and become fossils. By radioactive dating methods it is possible to estimate the age of the fossil. Figure 1 shows a diagram of the current fossil record. The Britannica also says that some intermediate forms between species have been found. In Darwin's time the lack of evidence of intermediate forms between monkeys and humans was a big issue (the famous 'missing link'). In the meantime, several missing links have been discovered: the Australopithecus, the Homo Habilis, and the Homo Erectus. Figure 2 shows the evolution of the human brain size on the basis of human fossils. After interpolating the data, it appears as though the different human species are related and their brain has been constantly growing.

(ii) 'Structural similarities'

Similarities in the anatomies of different species indicate that they must be related. For example, turtles, horses, humans, birds, and bats have a very similar bone structure. Many species also have an imperfect organic structure, or unnecessary limbs (like the forelimbs of turtles). These must be remnants of the process of speciation.

(iii) 'Embryonic development'

The way embryos of different species develop is very similar, especially during the early phases. For example, human embryos develop gills and a tail during some phase. This similarity lasts longer for more related species. In later phases the embryos differentiate.

(iv) 'Biogeography'

Species in different geographic areas show characteristics that are found only in those areas. They must have evolved from ancestors that settled in the area.

(v) 'Molecular biology'

Molecular biology has shown that the DNA structures of all organisms, from bacteria to humans, are very similar in composition and operation. There is qualitative and quantitative proof. This is an indication of common descent. Barbour (222) further mentions that it is possible to estimate the date when a new variation of a species originated by comparing the DNA. The result of this dating method is consistent with the dating of fossils and with the history of the anatomy of species. Another type of evidence is an experiment by Miller in 1953 (Barbour, 226). He mixed chemicals (heated water and some gases) and subjected the mixture to sparks. Many amino acids (building blocks for DNA) were formed. Amino acids were also detected in the organic material of interstellar gas and in meteorites. In all three cases Glycine and Alanine were the two main amino acids. This gives rise to the hypothesis that maybe life originated from a 'cosmic soup' of chemicals or amino acids.

2.3 Problems

Much indirect evidence indicating evolution has been found. Many mechanisms have been constructed that can explain evolution. But direct evidence for the evolution theory has not yet been found. Barbour (223) says that no one has observed the formation of a completely new species. The fossil record shows very few really new species. In experiments, only variations of existing species have been observed. Barbour (226-227) also says that the origin of life and DNA are still unknown. Although there are hypotheses, the question of how DNA could have developed is still a 'chicken-and-egg' question.

The Britannica also says that the fossil record is incomplete. To begin with, only a small percentage of organisms are conserved as fossils, and of this only a small part has been discovered. Despite the Britannica's claim that the evolution theory is as well accepted among scientists as 'the roundness of the Earth,' there are alternative views. The 'intelligent design' theory is currently very much in the public mind, because of a court case in the USA about whether the intelligent design theory should be taught at school as an alternative to the evolution theory (Goodstein 5/11/2005). Behe (2001, 247-250) argues that organisms consist of 'irreducibly complex' biological systems. These systems would be rendered useless if any component is left out. They function only as a whole. Therefore they cannot have developed gradually as the evolution theory says. There must have been intelligent design.

Some scientists are not convinced about the mechanism of chance. Cees Dekker, a Dutch professor of nanotechnology, says in an interview that he is very critical about the theory that life originated as a result of chance. (Versluis 2004). Simon Conway Morris, a professor of evolutionary palaeobiology at Cambridge, states in an interview that evolution is not a random process but a process with direction leading to a limited number of results. (Smit 2004).