Blog-IT-o ergo sum

	10/2/2004

My conscience

"'A change in allele frequencies over time.' By that definition, evolution is an indisputable fact."

I have to thank Ed Cone for providing me the link that contained the above statement. I don't know that if we use that definition we are still talking about what most people think of as evolution, but I think that the recognition that "allele frequencies change over time" is all that one needs to move forward and create the entire bio-technology industry, without getting bogged down as to what we can divine from bones tossed on the ground hundreds of millions of years ago.

That's were I really wanted to go with a discussion on evolution. Separating the science of the issue that deals with genetic engineering from the emotional debate as how man came to be as he is.

After making this separation finally then, I would now like ask what useful end does it serve to continue to look in the fossil record to "prove" the Theory of Evolution? While fossil knowledge can certainly be helpful for things like oil exploration, this is actually the realm of geology; another science useful to the continued improvement in man's state of existence.

Considering the actual state of things, what I would like to propose is that the continued research into developing the Theory of Evolution should be done on a private basis. That is, if we find that there is no useful application of the knowledge derived from this specific line of study, then it should not be funded with taxpayer money. In fact such necessity of private funding would for libertarians hold for almost all research. But, the Theory of Evolution I believe is a special case worth considering.

My premise here is that what generally passes for the study of evolution, far beyond the succinct definition at the top of this post, is a matter that has no practical application in the real world worthy of mandatory taxpayer support. It is, I would say, someone's expensive hobby and as such they should be free to pursue it to the fullest extent...with their own money.

Going CT here, I will postulate even farther and suggest that one plausible purpose for the intensity in promoting the Theory of Evolution, to the exclusion of any heretical thought to the contrary, is to further the cause of the growth of the State. That is, as it was developed contemporaneously with Marxist theory detailing the evolution of society, the theory of evolution was manipulated from its outset in the quest to justify the inevitability of Man (the State) replacing God (the divine) in ruling the affairs of humans.

Quoting from a worthy apologia for Darwinism, "All human thought is, like animal and plant structures, basically pragmatic. We adopt it and value it, not because it's true but because, at this particular moment of time in these particular circumstances, it works." Marxism being the "particular circumstance at the particular moment of time" can not Totalitarianism as pursued by Marx, Lenin, Stalin, Mussolini, Hitler and others be simply viewed as natural selection at work in the social construct? The strongest survives?

Before anyone goes ballistic, please just help me out first and provide a short list detailing some of the improvements to man's condition that have resulted from the development of the Theory of Evolution...recognizing that genetic engineering flourishes not on the work of Darwin but on a devout monk who for some reason Darwin never reciprocated in reading.

7:56:15 PM

comment []