Of course, if one begins from the premise that God cannot have had a hand in it, Occam’s Razor would lead us to the extrapolation to a point source. It is certainly the simplest way to explain things in the absence of any intelligent design. But how does that qualify it as “fact”?
Given two books by the same author, I can draw many conclusions about one from the other, particularly because I know they share an author. Similarly, it’s useful to do the same with biology. But in terms of logic, I don’t see how “the fact of evolution” follows as a necessity from the physical evidence.
I expect that those who find mere mention of evolution anathema will consider this article nearly as bad, and that those who consider belief in the theory of evolution b’chol dikdukeha u-prateha (in all its details and specifics) to be the sine qua non of civilized thinking people will see this as a sign that I’m a primitive ignoramus. I disagree on both counts. Answers aren’t always simple.
