Skip to main content

Evolution, Music, and Creation

There is just no correcting some people who refuse outright to accept evolution. Today's "Creation Moment" extols the ability of some to make music, and they assert that, were evolution true, there would be no reason to have musical ability. "Even evolutionists appear to be puzzled by this [musical ability development." Well, this is one evolutionist who doesn't stand stunned before the fact of humanity's musical ability.

Obviously the anonymous author of this post (found here: http://www.creationmoments.com/radio/transcripts/musical-memory) has not the least bit of knowledge about evolution in that he ascribes to evolution a kind of forward thinking and planning that it does not have ("they would have no reason to do so"). Evolution is not God, it is not some self-aware entity outside the natural world that chooses and plans. The author later reverts back and seems to be unable to understand why "mindless evolution" would even be able to develop, much less retain, musical ability.

But for those of us who make a habit of feeding the birds, this is no question at all. Why do birds have musical ability? Why do frogs and crickets make their own form of music with their calls? To attract a mate, of course. The same must surely be true of human beings; in regards to sexual selection, musical ability may have been something preferred in the distant past, and those with it had a better chance of passing on their genes. This seems a likely explanation for musical ability, that it too, just like speech and lactose tolerance, could have evolved with no need to invoke the rather small God of the creationists.

One can only conclude that, as usual, their ignorance is willful rather than being a reflection upon the poor state of evolutionary knowledge.

Comments

  1. I'm a musician and I believe you're dead wrong. Music is too complex for just courtship purposes. In fact developing and playing complex music is above the ability of majority of humans.

    A woman would probably discourage a musician from developing further skills and deep music, since it does occupy a lot of his passion. Most women will consider a musician as a non-wealthy alarm signal and stay away.

    Music is a personal thing. A world to enjoy or escape to. An EXTRA capacity and gift from God.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

"Unanswerable Questions" for Evolution Part One

Creation Ministries International has launched a new initiative, which seems a lot like all the other creationists blitzkriegs before it. With the wonderfully creative tagline of "Question Evolution", CMI intends to challenge "evolutionists" and their "indoctrination" of high school students with the supposed dogma of evolution. They also aim to  cut the population of atheists by half , presumably by challenging the "faith" that every atheist (and only atheists, no "real Christians") is supposed to hold in Darwin's great idea. The main thrust of this is a tract with fifteen "unanswerable" questions for evolutionists. I'm done putting quotation marks around the word, evolutionists; from here on out I ask my readers to recognize that it is a creationist term that is about as silly as calling someone a general relativist (accepts general relativity) or germist (for accepting germ theory). Regardless, CMI seems just as i...

What Creationists Don't Understand

There are quite a number of concepts that one could successfully argue that creationists fail to understand; whether this is out of a simple lack of knowledge or willful ignorance is hard to say and certainly can't be generalized to every creationist. Some, the everyday creationist, I would like to think simply haven't been exposed to the evidence. Others, the holders of Ph.D's in various fields, especially in the sciences, who happily reject evolutionary theory are willfully ignorant (John Whitmore comes to mind). But I think there is one idea that creationists of all stripes simply fail to understand; evolution is based on solid, visible evidence. Evolution is not some tenant of a "science religion" that descended down to Darwin from on high, it is an explanatory framework based on quite a lot of facts and mountains of evidence. It is evidence that leads to the conclusions of evolution, that life changes over time and, given the long history of the earth, all ...

The Absurdity/Agony of War

Science writer Mary Roach is never one to shy away from parts of science that verge on the absurd, as anyone who has read any of her books surely knows. I'd read two of her previous books, and been enchanted enough by Roach's unique combination of endless curiosity and a wry sense of humor that I rushed to lay my hands on her newest book. Grunt: The Curious Science of Humans at War will not fail in living up to the expectations that fans of her work will bring. Those who have never read her before will be hard-pressed to put down a book that I finished in a few short days.  The real joy of reading something by Mary Roach is her talent for seeking out strange areas of science that a reader might never have known about. As an investigator, she answers questions you never knew you had. Her newest work   is no exception. We discover, for instance, how the military tests the ability of a fighter jet to survive a mid-air collision with a large bird--by firing a dead chicken...