Neil visits the University of California, Irvine and talks with Francisco Ayala in this episode. Francisco Ayala is University Professor and Donald Bren Professor of Biological Sciences at the University of California, Irvine. He received his Ph.D. in genetics from Columbia University. Ayala has been president and chairman of the Board of the American Association for the Advancement of Science, and is a member of the U.S. National Academy of Sciences, the American Academy of Arts and Sciences, the American Philosophical Society and many foreign academies.
His scientific research focuses on population and evolutionary genetics, including the origin of species, genetic diversity of populations, the origin of malaria, the population structure of parasitic protozoa, and the molecular clock of evolution. He has published more than 1,000 articles and is author or editor of 37 books, Including Am I a Monkey? Six Big Questions about Evolution.
A former Dominican priest, Ayala also writes about the interface between religion and science, and on philosophical issues concerning epistemology, ethics, and the philosophy of biology. In 2002, he received the National Medal of Science from President George W. Bush at a White House ceremony, and he was the 2010 recipient of the Templeton Prize.
David Roemer
August 4, 2012
Prof. Ayala expressed in the podcast the same thing he said in one of his books:
“Two major puzzles of human evolution remain. One puzzle is the genetic basis of the ape-to-human transformation.…The other puzzle is the brain-to-mind transformation. We know that the 30 billion neurons in our brains communicate between themselves and with other nerve cells by chemical and electrical signals. How do these signals become transformed into perceptions, feelings, ideas, critical arguments, aesthetic emotions, and ethical and religious values? And how, out of this diversity of experiences, does a unitary reality emerge, the mind or self? The soul created by God, you might say, accounts for both transformations: ape to human and brain to mind. This religious answer may be satisfactory for believers, but it is not scientifically satisfactory. I still want to know how the anatomical and behavioral traits that differentiate us from apes emerge out of our genetic differences; I also want to know the biological correlates that account for mental experiences.” (Darwin’s Gift to Science and Religion, p. 10)
Ayala admits that he doesn’t understand the connection between the mind and the brain, but he thinks this is a question which can be solved by scientific observations. This is a perfectly good theory, however, there is no evidence for it. Science has success only with questions that arise from things we see. We do not see that we have free will and can create images and thoughts. We know about the human mind because we can make ourselves the subject of our own knowledge.
The theory of the mind-body problem that is supported by the evidence and judged to be true by rational people is that it is a mystery. Hence, humans are embodied spirits or spirited bodies. This means the human soul is spiritual. It means that evolution only applies to the bodies of humans not their souls.
David Roemer
August 4, 2012
This podcast had the support of the National Center of Science Education, which opposes creationism and intelligent design. Its nemesis, the Design Institute, advocates ID. Both of these organizations cause many people to think natural selection explains the complexity of life, not just the adaptation of species to the environment. This means the second law of thermodynamics (about entropy) does not apply to biological evolution, just like it doesn’t apply to the evolution of stars.
The American Journal of Physics published an absurd article (“Entropy and evolution†at
https://docs.google.com/open?id=0Bw0xQqr5YbtJQ09ybDR0ejd2TTA)
with a fake equation proving that evolution does not violate the second law. I’v sent emails to the National Center of Science Education, the Design Institute, and Francisco Ayala explaining why the article should be retracted. If they love science, they will put pressure on the AJP to retract the article. These are links to my correspondence with physicists about the article:
http://newevangelist.me/2012/02/22/physics-department-of-new-york-university/
http://newevangelist.me/2012/02/02/american-journal-of-physics/
http://newevangelist.me/2012/02/23/american-association-of-physics-teachers/
http://newevangelist.me/2012/05/06/american-institute-of-physics/
http://newevangelist.me/2011/12/07/american-scientific-affiliation-2/
http://newevangelist.me/2012/08/02/first-things/
An essay explaining why the AJP article is absurd is at
http://www.catholictruthscotland.com/MAYnewsletter12.pdf