Debate Over Evolution Will Soon Be History, Says Leakey

Hugh Pickens writes "According to noted paleoanthropologist Richard Leakey, sometime in the next 15 to 30 years scientific discoveries about evolution will have accelerated to the point that 'even the skeptics can accept it.' 'If you don't like the word evolution, I don't care what you call it, but life has changed. You can lay out all the fossils that have been collected and establish lineages that even a fool could work up. So the question is why, how does this happen? It's not covered by Genesis. There's no explanation for this change going back 500 million years in any book I've read from the lips of any God.' Leakey began his work searching for fossils in the mid-1960s and his team unearthed a nearly complete 1.6-million-year-old skeleton in 1984 that became known as 'Turkana Boy,' the first known early human with long legs, short arms and a tall stature. At 67, Leakey conducts research with his wife, Meave, and daughter, Louise, and the family claims to have unearthed 'much of the existing fossil evidence for human evolution.' Leakey, an atheist, insists he has no animosity toward religion."

Comments

Don't bet on it.

[neokushan]

Never underestimate the stubbornness of sheer ignorance.

Re:Don't bet on it.

[khr]

Agreed. I don't think Dr. Leakey's argument holds water. The main problem isn't that there's a lack of evidence now, it's that people who don't believe it simply don't believe it, and choose not to. More evidence isn't likely to get change people's beliefs.

Maybe in that time frame people who believe the evidence will come up with more convincing arguments, better debating material, but not simply more discoveries.

Re:Don't bet on it.

[UnknowingFool]

It has never been about proof or knowledge. This debate like many others has always been about faith. For some groups, they would hold onto their beliefs because they are defined by them. They cannot see past those boundaries.

Take for instance one of my high school friends who was aghast that I voted Barack Obama in the last election. One of main reasons she cited that she voted for McCain was because she honestly believed in the Birther nonsense. She still does to this day despite overwhelming evidence that there was no issue. For her, she would rather believe Obama somehow cheated than accept a world where her candidate wasn't elected in a fair election.

You see this in other aspects like fans of football teams. Truthers, Area 51, Birthers--Sometimes people cannot accept we don't live in a world of their design.

Re:Don't bet on it.

[Waffle Iron]

More evidence isn't likely to get change people's beliefs.

If someone believes in supernatural phenomena, than natural evidence would be completely irrelevant, no matter what the quantity.

Re:Don't bet on it.

[jedidiah]

Leakey has made a fatally flawed assumption. He's giving the other side more credit than they really deserve. He assumes that they are genuine skeptics.

They aren't skeptics. They are religious zealots that view anything that contradicts their world view as a threat. They are also a throwback. They are behind the times about 500 years.

So adding another 30 years to that won't help.

Re:Don't bet on it.

[m.ducharme]

Careful there, Occam's Razor is a handy tool, but not a logical argument. Occam's Razor can be applied or withheld, but not violated.

Re:Don't bet on it.

[tnk1]

Honestly, that's as much of a belief as if you believed a giant sky fairy created you. There is no proof that there is no greater purpose in life either. That's your opinion based on the fact that you see no merit in religious texts as opposed to scientific advances. Even the most hardcore acceptance of the debunking of religious texts doesn't eliminate the possibility of a deity of some form previously unknown.

Evolution is not the "why", it is merely part of the "how". Perhaps there is really no "why", but I don't know anyone who can answer that question with any confidence who is not doing so irrationally.

Don't count on it

[GammaKitsune]

His fatal mistake is to assume that creationists care about evidence.

Re:Don't count on it

[Jackie_Chan_Fan]

They are.

Re:God's experiment in free will

[TheGratefulNet]

even worse: to say that you have so much 'riding on it' and yet there's not a scrap of evidence to support these wacky notions.

what gives? a choice you supposedly make now that affects you, *forever*; and the guy who is ruling in court is nowhere to be found and never, credibly, has been?

yeah, I'll believe that. sure. foreverness depends on a guy we've never seen, can't contact and who 'hides' because, well, he's shy or something.

but foreverness depends on how you bet. yup. makes perfect sense to me. seems just and totally fair. yup.

Re:God's experiment in free will

[TheGratefulNet]

fact: people are mostly scared and mostly can't relate to things beyond storybook levels.

fact: there is a LOT of fear in this world and it is mysterious to most. people need comforting. anyone who can sell a convincing story will be warmly accepted in their hearts.

its a set of human needs that religion 'fills', even if it does so via false information. having *some* answer, being stated with confidence, is mostly what people want. its very sad but its a true statement about humanity (regardless of time and place and culture).

you and I know its all fairy stories. but you and I are not typical 'scared human beings'. we have taken control of our fear and don't need fake answers. in that way, you and I are a percent of a percent. not even close to a majority. this is why we have the problems we have today: because most people are at the level of scared children and never, even in old age, will they progress beyond that.

most people *want* to be ruled. they *want* to be spoon fed info. "thinking is hard!"

Re:False Dichotomy

[dingen]

The US is not the world. In large parts of our planet, people are having absolutely no problems whatsoever with accepting the theory of evolution.

Re:God's experiment in free will

[Digital Vomit]

I'm 100% certain that killing your own child for backtalking (Exodus 21:17, Leviticus 10:9) is not "the best thing for yourself".

The sooner the entire world can bury all their holy books in the trash heap of history, the better.

Re:God's experiment in free will

[Alsee]

congrats on not respecting other people's beliefs

Any who came up with the idiotic idea that beliefs are inherently entitled to any respect?

If your neighbor has a belief that he's being anal probed by gay alien government agents, are you seriously suggesting that belief warrants any respect whatsoever? Does it warrant any more respect if someone believes in walking talking snakes? Does it warrant any more respect when someone believes God wrote, or divinely inspired, a book which (in part) orders parents to murder disrespectful children?

I respect people's freedom to believe stupid stuff. But that does not mean I have to respect the belief itself, nor does it mean I have to respect a person who believes stupid stuff.

-