Atheistic censorship of views favourable to the existence of a Creator is considered by zealots of Naturalism as warranted on the ground that such views are anti-science. Even the idea of deducing an unseen Designer-as a detective can deduce what took place at the crime scene-is considered intrusion of religious views upon science. The entrenched power exerted by them in the Academy means that careers and funding can be destroyed if one takes a public stance against evolution. Happily, most scientists are not zealots and many probably do not care for evolution; they simply want to get on with careers in chosen disciplines. If enough individuals keep standing up against intimidation and speak up for objective truth long enough, evolution theory will eventually be seen as outmoded science.
Theistic Evolution
Let us now consider the second alternative of Theistic Evolution. In seeking a synthesis of evolution and theology, this concept holds that God created the Universe billions of years ago and used the process of evolution and/or divine intervention in the creation of life forms and subsequent changes beyond kind.
Theistic evolutionists are vague about their definition of “evolution”. Is it not fascinating that something over which so many heated arguments have taken place turns out to be so poorly defined? To evolutionists, is evolution “change over time” either slowly through imperceptible changes or rapidly in intermittent bursts via punctuated equilibria? Is it “natural selection”? As noted already, in public perception evolution is not about micro changes between tabby cats and black cats; intuitively it’s held to involve change beyond kind-but this perception of supposed evolution is contradicted by the actual findings of specialists. Gould’s case for punctuated equilibria has been challenged on grounds that
it attempts to prove something by its absence and that