I'm reading a fantastic book by Bill Bryson titled
A short History of Nearly Everything
http://www.amazon.com/Short-History-Nearly-Everything/dp/076790818XOne section is about a theory that describes and explains how continents "drift" from place to place. Early in the 20th century there were *major unexplained mysteries* -- such as matching fossils and rocks on different continents, and why the rocks at certain places on the seafloor were always dated as being much newer than rocks elsewhere, and there was some weirdness about how magnetic rocks switched poles... and so forth
Over time, new information was uncovered, theories were proposed and rejected; often because one or more facets of the mysteries were not explained. Eventually a cohesive theory was developed, what we now call the Theory of Plate Tectonics, and it accounts for basically all of the unexplained geological mysteries. It is such a good theory that it is now universally accepted as fact.
So, why is this thread in the Philosophy and Religion TA?
I want to compare and contrast the Theory of Plate Tectonics with the Theory of Evolution.
It seems to me that before either theory was developed, the situations were similar: Unexplained phenomena had been detected and measured. Scientists tried to find ways to explain the mysteries in the light of other natural phenomena. There was disagreement in the ranks (Einstein famously discounted the idea of continental drift), but as more and more evidence came to light, the theory became more and more solid.
In the case of Plate Tectonics, the scientist have been so convinced of its truth, that no other theory competes. Most significantly, the public at large has no issue with it -- it is taught as simple fact in grammar school.
But in the case of Evolution, much of the public does *not* agree with the scientists.
Now the thought experiment: What if the Bible had included a passage like:
The Firmament was divided from the Waters and was fixed in place. The
shapes of the land were pleasing to His eyes and He spake: Let no man say
that the mountains have moved nor that the seas have changed location.
If that had been the case, would the theory still be in dispute? Would millions of people say that regardless of the evidence, continents don't move? Would one passage in an ancient book trump decades of scientific research?
