by Martin Davie
As Dr Zachary Ardern and Professor Richard Bugg have noted in their very helpful blog posts on the subject,[1] there are numerous scientific problems with the account of the development of life on earth put forward in the BBC’s series Evolution, which is presented by Chris Packham and currently showing live and on iplayer. In this blog post I do not intend to repeat the points they have already made, but, rather, to explain why the materialist worldview underlying the series is one that it is unreasonable to accept.
In his blog, Ardern notes that Evolution ‘states and restates with various formulations that evolutionary processes rule out divine involvement.’ He cites three quotations from the series that illustrate the series’ message ‘that because there are processes involved, we are the product of nature rather than foresight’
‘It’s easy to imagine that all of this is like somehow preordained … that it’s been made, a world of balance and purpose. But the truth—the truth is much wilder. This is a world of survivors. [Ep. 1: 0m 45s]
There was no blueprint, no grand design. Evolution is a process, shaped by powerful invisible drivers. [Ep. 1: 4m 51s]
We’re not perfect, and we weren’t made. We’ve been shaped by exactly the same forces that have shaped every living organism on this planet. [Ep. 5: 52m 5s].’
These quotations vividly illustrate why it is right to say that Evolution puts forward a materialist worldview. The traditional Christian worldview classically summarised in the opening words of the Apostles; Creed. ‘I believe in God the Father almighty, maker of heaven and earth,’ holds that all that exists in the universe (‘heaven and earth’) was created and is sustained by God. The materialist world view, by contrast, holds that nothing exists except the materials of which the universe is made up. As a result, everything that exists and occurs is the result of the interaction of these natural forces (which is the point being made in the three quotations above).
We can see the difference between these two worldviews very clearly if we compare the work of the nineteenth century Christian writer William Paley with the work of the contemporary atheist writer Richard Dawkins.