We cited this essay before here, but it is worth reposting. There are very few zones of sanity in the field of the ‘evolution’ Big Mess
Biologists are probably the most clueless gang in whole cadre of scientists. The problem from start to finish is that ‘evolution’ occurs on different levels, and real evolution in a sort of macro sense is invisible to the naked eye. That means that scientists are stuck in one half of the answer and can’t get unstuck. The result is a dogmatic blindness to their own subject matter and a form of social control as ideology that is pernicious. This situation is a threat to science itself as an untrustworthy enterprise that means to control social belief, this in the ammbiguiy of capitalist ideology and its suspicious resemblance to selectionist Darwinian, survival of the fittest thinking as both biological and economic.
Here to be sure the confusion generated by creationist assualts on Darwinism has tended to contract the field with the obsessive Darwinian mantras turned offialese by the likes of Dawkins and the atheist obsessives.
It is clear from the eonic effect that evolution is far different from expectations and that it something so supercomplex as to be beyond the wilted intelligence of indoctrinated biologists.
It is important to consider this larger view and to see that world history gives us (most probably) a glimpse of how evolution works. Albeit with the catch that history and evolution although related are different variants of a more complex and almost unfathomable mystery at best detected yet hard to reify. It is what you get if a mechanical process so conceived turns out to have a teleological aspect, something that conventional science cannot handle. It is important to free science of religious claims but at the same time to see that banishing design factors is only confusing the issue. Let’s be clear and complain of the confusion that creationists have produced but acknowledge that if ‘evolution’ gets confused by ‘god’ thinking it is because the scale of evolution is so stupendous and seemingly creative in its generation of form that red herring of intelligent design lurks as a constant suggestion. In a way, the collapse of the ‘god’ factor as conceptual morass was a long step that has taken more than a century to play itself out. Perhaps realizing how the god concept muddles an already obscure mystery is finally able to caution evolutionary oversimplification.
Take a long hard look at the eonic effect to see that ‘evolution’ in this new sense is a creative mystery with a strange directionality.
In the meantime it is is time to tell biologists, you’re fired for having sown such confusion at the expense of cultural sanity.
Further it is time to see just how much of human cultural evolution is a set of gifts of nature and the emergent civilization is one such cornucopia of natural profundity. The reductionist era has failed and the evolution question remains as intractable as ever.
The long read: A new wave of scientists argues that mainstream evolutionary theory needs an urgent overhaul. Their opponents have dismissed them as misguided careerists – and the conflict may determine the future of biology
Source: Do we need a new theory of evolution? | Evolution | The Guardian