Letter: Darwin's legacy

Andrew Cosgrove
Friday 10 September 1999 18:02 EDT
Comments

Your support helps us to tell the story

From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.

At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.

The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.

Your support makes all the difference.

Sir: Bernard Jones, in expressing doubt about Darwin (letter, 8 September), raises some interesting points.

First, saying, "It is hard to imagine introductory phases of many phenomena," is not an argument against evolution. Just because one does not have the wit to conceive how something may have happened does not mean that it did not happen. I do not really understand how my computer works, but this letter is evidence that it does.

Second, it is very easy to say, "Isn't it amazing? For that to work, all the parts must be arranged just so - and that is exactly how they are arranged!" But that is the point. All of the systems where the parts were not arranged just so did not work properly, and so died out. We are left to observe the descendants of the one working system.

Lastly, creationists often cite the vertebrate eye as a system which could never have evolved by chance, and so must have been designed. Anyone with a passing knowledge of ocular physiology can see that the eye is riddled with design flaws and so, if it is an example of conscious design, you have to be worried for the safety of a universe under the control of its designer.

On the other hand, the eye is a perfect example of an organ that has been jerry-built from what was available, and has just "happened" into a functioning device. It strongly supports an evolutionary view of the world.

ANDREW COSGROVE

Corsham, Wiltshire

Join our commenting forum

Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies

Comments

Thank you for registering

Please refresh the page or navigate to another page on the site to be automatically logged inPlease refresh your browser to be logged in