Jeff Davidson, Science must be free from bias, but it rarely works out that way. A flurry of mainstream media reporters and left-leaning politicians, led by Joe Biden, Kamala Harris, and Nancy Pelosi exclaim on a daily basis that the Trump administration is somehow ignoring “the science” when addressing the coronavirus pandemic. This occurs despite the relentless efforts the administration makes every day.
It is fair to ask, does the Left adhere to their own exhortations? For a clearer picture of how the Left regards science, let us step away from their current virus-related assertions and associated political implications.
Beleaguered Brains and Blank Slates
Evidence of the Left’s scientific short-sightedness abounds. Many believe in the human mind as a tabula rasa or “blank slate” shaped almost entirely by culture. Yet, studies of twins separated at birth and later reunited confirm that inborn characteristics play a large role in an individual’s development.
The Left contends that GMOs are bad, yet humankind has been genetically modifying organisms for the past 10,000 years through breeding and selection. The size and quality of fruit and vegetables today, for example, dwarf their ancient counterparts.
Many on the Left won’t acknowledge male and female differences in synapse firing and brain functioning, male and female aptitude and behavioral differences, real differences in IQ levels among specific gene pools, the awareness and sensory levels of human fetuses at various stages of development, the role of motivation and incentive in human behavior, the impact of solar activity on Earth’s climate, or the big one – the limits of evolution theory.
A Conceptual Model, not a Definitive Guide
The periodic table offers an ordered depiction of the chemical elements. Each element is listed based on its atomic number (roughly its number of protons), electron configuration, and associated chemical properties. The periodic table presents “atomic” tendencies in the same column – elements which share similar behaviors.
While physiognomy, telegony, spontaneous generation, and transmutation of species, among numerous other theories have come and gone, the periodic table lives on. Over the last 200 years, it has been adapted and refined, and represents a vital tool for chemists, researchers, teachers, and students. The periodic table is, however, still in progress. It offers a working model of atomic structures. What is unknown is still vast.
Likewise, evolution is a theory that explains the development of much, but not all, of life on Earth. Many people, especially those on the Left, blindly accept evolution theory without any further inquiry. Its shortcomings are apparent when considering what happened before the big bang, what caused the big bang, the origination of matter unleashed by the big bang, the origination of Earth’s organic molecules, how complex biological mechanisms evolved, and why asexual reproduction is prevalent everywhere on Earth in the form of bacteria.
Much is Missing
Evolution explains, in part, formulation of life on Earth and likely elsewhere. Life, as we know it, occurs with some combination of six elements: carbon, hydrogen, oxygen, nitrogen, phosphorus, and sulfur. Life also requires moisture, and heat or energy. Earth has water and heat. Scientists can’t depict how organic molecules first appeared on the planet.
Evolutionary biology deals with how life changed after its origin; it doesn’t explain the creation of atoms or molecules, the Earth itself, the Milky Way, or the other 800+ billion known galaxies, each with multi-billions of stars, and each star with one to ten or more planets. Nor does evolution explain the assembly of near-infinite mass in an infinitesimally small space prior to the Big Bang, the Redshift, or associated Doppler Effects.
As the periodic table is to chemistry and physics, evolution is a model for discerning many, but not all, aspects of how organic life develops. Evolutionary change is not necessary, however, for some species to exist and persist. Many mosses, fungi, sharks, and crayfish, among other species, have barely changed over long stretches of time.
The Universe has not Always Existed
On scientific grounds, the notion that the universe has always existed has been debunked. Newton’s Laws of Thermodynamics reveal that the universe had a beginning. The First Law of Thermodynamics holds that only a finite amount of energy exists. The Second Law of Thermodynamics reveals that the amount of available energy in the universe is continually decreasing. If the universe has always existed, all available energy would have dissipated long before Homo erectus appeared.
The best and only scientific explanation for the universe’s existence is that it was created by a higher intelligence. If you lean left or otherwise, perhaps you can’t handle the physics, but considering your unfounded attacks on promising COVID-19 remedies and therapies, real science isn’t of much interest to you anyways.