Evolution scientist wins $1.5 million prize
March 25th, 2010, 8:00 am · 45 Comments · posted by Pat Brennan, science, environment editor
A UC Irvine scientist famous for tackling big questions in evolution — and for publicly facing down advocates of creationism and intelligent design — is the winner of a $1.5 million prize from the Templeton Foundation, a Pennsylvania-based organization that tries to foster dialogue between science and religion.
Francisco Ayala accepting Templeton prize in Washington D.C. Thursday, courtesy John Templeton Foundation.
Francisco Ayala, 76, says he will give his prize money to non-profit organizations — an amount of money that surpasses even that given to winners of the Nobel Prize.
The award was announced Thursday morning in Washington, D.C.
Ayala, who was once ordained as a Dominican priest but left the priesthood to pursue evolutionary research, collaborated with some of the field’s biggest names to reveal evolutionary secrets of fruit flies as well as the parasitic microbes that cause Chagas disease and malaria.
He recently discovered that the parasite that causes malaria jumped from chimpanzees to humans, and began spreading in the tropics only about 5,000 years ago.
He also took part in court fights over the teaching of evolution in the 1980s. One case led a judge to strike down an Arkansas law calling for “balanced treatment” of creationism and and evolution, while another, involving a Louisiana law requiring parallel teaching of creation science and evolution in public schools, ended with the law being declared an unconstitutional attempt to advance religion.
Ayala, the Donald Bren professor of biological sciences at UC Irvine, also has authored several books dealing with science, creationism and “intelligent design.”
But despite polls showing that many in the United States believe in a biblical account of life’s beginnings, Ayala says he remains optimistic that creationism is on the retreat — and that the scientific and religious communities are increasingly willing to talk to one another.
Q. When you talk to religious groups, how do you frame the relationship between science and religion?
A. First, of course, there is no necessary contradition between religion and science. Science and religion are like two windows through which we look at the world. The world is one in the same, but what we see is different. Religion deals with the meaning of life, the purpose of life, the relationship to the creator and each other, and the moral values which govern our lives. Science has to do with the constitution of matter, the generation of organisms and their adaptations. These are different matters. There is no overlap in subject matter. I am very interested in dispelling the prejudice that exists among religious people that science is contradictory to religion.
I usually go farther than that, saying there is no contradiction. I say that science — evolution — is compatible with religion. Creation and intelligent design are not compatible with religion, and they are presented in the name of religion.
Q. Please elaborate on that point.
A. When one thinks about the implications of intelligent design, they are very anti-religious, at least for people who believe in an omnipotent and benevolent God. Our jaw is not big enough for our teeth, so we have wisdom teeth removed. Any engineer who designed the human jaw would be fired the next day.
And the birth canal is not big enough for the head of the baby. Millions of babies died over the centuries because of that, and millions of women, too.
The reproductive system of humans is so badly designed that more than 20 percent of all pregnancies end in spontaneous abortion during the first two months of pregnancy.
People who claim we were specifically designed by God, by implication, are accusing God of being an enormous-scale abortionist.
Then you have the cruelty of the living world. Some of the parasites can live only by killing their hosts. The cruelty and misery of the world attributed to design by God does not seem appropriate. Instead, it’s natural processes — that’s what evolution does.
Q. How do religious people react to these statements?
A. Mostly, religious people see matters similar to the way that I do. A minority of people — they are very few, really — write books about intelligent design, write books and articles. You can count them with the fingers of your hands.
Then there are groups of fundamentalists who want to interpret the bible literally — the world was created 6,000 years ago. And that of course is unfortunate.
Q. But yet you remain optimistic that the two sides are more willing to talk?
A. Scientists are becoming more and more convinced of the need for dialogue. On the religious side you still have the general problem of a lack of science education. A large number of the population has very little, if any, science education. In the United States, newspapers generally dedicate more space to the horoscope than to science.
Q. Do polls show that a large segment of the public favors creationism?
A. It depends how the questions are asked. “Are humans created by God in the way they are now?” Many would say, “Yes,” to that. But then if you ask the question, “Do you accept that evolution has happened, and has happened also in humans?” — a majority would say yes to that also.
Q. Are you still a religious person?
A. I don’t answer that question. I don’t want to be accused (of favoring) one side or another.
Q. Is the push to add creationism to school curriculums spreading in the United States?
A. I don’t think so. It will appear here and there. Many more happened in the ’80s. At that time the matter was coming out again and again, in different states, different places. It happens from time to time. I think it’s less now than it used to be.
Latest posts:
Reader Comments
Comments are encouraged, but you must follow our User Agreement.- Keep it civil and stay on topic.
- No profanity, vulgarity, racial slurs or personal attacks.
- People who harass others or joke about tragedies will be blocked.
45 Comments
-
ADVERTISEMENT
-
Things to do
-
-
-
-
16th annual People’s Choice
From your favorite restaurants and shops to the best day spa in town, here are your choices for the number one places to eat, shop and play in O.C.
Browse the 2009 Best of Orange County winners-
ADVERTISEMENT
It’s good to see that he has an open mind. Usually religious groups (Christians) refuse to believe in evolution. Congrats and way to go, Francisco on proving these groups wrong!
Here’s a banana for all of you that have monkeys in your family tree.
Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed – Watch it! In its entirety. Dont be scared of being educated.
Actually Jane Goodall observed that people and the Chimps are very similar. They murder make war and abuse each other. They can also die of a broken heart.
A dog would be more in line with intelligent design beliefs as they do not question anything. They are loyal beyond question.
Very good Pat love it.
Thanks! I love bananas! (and I also love science, evolution, this story, and God).
All I can say is that I hope I look as good as this guy at 76. He has a good message too!
“[Religion and science] are different matters. There is no overlap in subject matter.”
Yes, there is, otherwise there wouldn’t be any controversy. Duh! Of course, Mr. Ayala *wishes* there wasn’t an overlap, which would support his theses. I am ashamed that this man ever became a priest, because he clearly he did not get a good education in theology or the “problem of evil”, and puts out the same fallacies that are so old that only people who have little education would fall for them. Spontaneous abortion? Uh, God is the author of life, so a child dying in a mother’s womb is not “evil” even though it gives us sorrow. And the fact that Ayala admit something outside of the design of God testifies to the fact that either he doesn’t believe in God, or that he fashions a god which has some power above it, therefore evolution or something else is his God. He’s shown his whole hand!
All the arguments he presents have been done before for over a thousand years! The real point is that religion and science DO overlap, and are complementary. Without either you have a stilted incomplete view of the world. We should watch out that our science does not become religion and our religion does not become science. But isn’t that what is going on?
Maybe he used the wrong word, then. There is overlap, there is no conflict between the existence of religion and current science.
Unless, of course, you choose to believe that the inaccuracy of any one part of the Bible negates the entire religion, of course.
There’s no overlap. The easiest way to determine this is by seeing that the vast majority of religious people want to claim there is one, and most science scholars do not.
If man evolved from monkeys, why are there still monkeys? George W. Bush made it.
No, no he didn’t.
OBAMA DID. u can’t prove evolution.
Let’s set this straight. Humans did not evolve from monkeys. Both evolved from the same hominid, but the homo sapien sapien — which is us — had evolved a number of branches beyond apes and monkeys.
jim: ah, what the good professor was doing with his remarks about “overlap” and god, the imperfect creator was to show to the fundamentalists the contraryness of their argument.
Truly, if we were created in “his” image, then he is as imperfect and flawed as we most assuredly are.
His biggest point, which you conveniently overlooked, was that the windows out of which we both view the world, give us perspectives that include the social, moral and philosophical meaning of life along with the biological processes and engineering changes that create and sustain life.
Here, two viewpoints can co-exist. Each view has value, though not in the same exact way.
Denial of evolution indicates a mind closed shut to the obvious and the verifiable. At one time, evolution may have been a “theory”, but that time passed many decades ago.
Creationism, on the other hand, is nothing but theory since all we have to base it on is man-crafted literature and simple faith. It’s a concept we may want, or in some ways need, but it’s not one that stands the acid tests.
I’ve always thought of religion as a way for institutional memory on what the rules are for living in large groups to be more easily passed down generation to generation.
Codifying the rules, in scripture shall we say, is the simplest way to tell each new generation what the social expectations are and how they are measured.
If we are to believe in a Supreme Being, then one of the first things we have to established is a reason why he/she/it gives a Rats Patoot about what we think or how we act.
Creationism does this. If god went through all of this creating stuff, just for us, then he must have a plan and we’d better pay attention.
Philosophically then, we are imbued with a purpose from the git. The rest of our existence then is spent trying to figure out what that is. We have a responsibility to pay off a debt.
That’s what makes us human. The struggle to find meaning where maybe none really exists.
This guy is nuts. Calling God out as a bad engineer? He does realize that the Bible does say that the pains of childbirth were added as part of the curse on the world because MANKIND sinned against God, after being warned not to.
He’s just another idiot who has sold out to propoganda, because Bible morality just “isnt cool” with this generation of self-entitlement and impatience.
I agree, it seems HE’S making moral judgements on GOD.
He’s not making a moral judgement. the morality of a god is not what he said. He said from a bio-mechanical standpoint, humans have engineering flaws. If those flaws evolved as such, then we are still an architectural work in progress. If the flaws were, somehow, INTENTIONAL, then why?
Faith requires no proof. None of this should bother you.
That’s a misunderstanding of faith. We all actually act every day on faith. Faith is based on evidence. We don’t prove everything for ourselves.
There is plenty of evidence for the Bible if people only look at it. And there are a lot of problems with evolution that evolutionists gloss over. Where the evidence has not been found, they still believe. hey, they are still looking for missing links all over, but their belief in evolution has them assume they just haven’t found them yet. There is even a museum up in the San Francisco bay area that shows an evolutionary line of human ancestry and it actually fills in assumed ancestors that have not been found! And it is not obvious that they have done so.
Also, have you ever looked at pictures when they find some missing link? They sometimes show pictures of it, but often much of it has been reconstructed from their assumptions and its not obvious in the photos how much was actual fossil pieces found vs what has been supplied.
Read Phillip Johnson (or maybe its Johnston)’s book Darwin on Trial. He looks at evidence that most don’t hear about.
I think it’s safe to say that the Professor probably does not believe in God — not in the same way that you do, anyway.
Do you realize that the Bible is a compilation of lots of books and stories by thousand of different authors from different time periods? And finally were put together by a bunch of religious leaders thousand of years later. No the bible is not an authoritative source nor is the direct manual to understand God.
You seem to be also tacking to old cliches that have been debunked lot of years ago. It would be prudent for you to go back under the rock you came from.
1 million… wait lets start over 1 billion years ago…No no no.. 200 billion years ago… ahaha.. Organization came from Chaos. A big bang.. Then somehow a fish came out of the ocean and grew a tail. Then he transformed into a lizard. That lizard soon became a goat frog. Then frog monkey to man.. And here we are today.
AHAHAHAHAHA I cant believe people have such FAITH in this garbage.
I’ve seen fossils of fish, cats, birds, reptiles… Hmm where’s the missing link. I guess we should all drink that cup of Kool Aid though because professor and politician said so. Ah wow!
Where’s the science in evolution? Carbon Dating? hahaha Really? Do the research… Carbon dating is completely innacurrate. A plastic ball made in a factory in the usa. Yet the carbon dating said it was millions of years old.. And you bought it… Hook, Line and sinker.
I give my props to evolutionists. They have more faith than any church or religious group I have seen.
And your degree is in …what? Or did you just come up with all these objections by intuition or “gut feelings”?
Dethklok – your posting shows your immaturity, and ignorance. I agree with HBgeek’s post. You have a degree in Bull S#$% I’m guessing…
fourthgeneration, wrong!
You are showing your ignorance. It is made up of 66 books by 44 authors over a period of 2-3 thousand years. No it was not put together thousands of years later.
You need to actually try reading the Bible for yourself as well as the evidence for its reliability. Archeology verifies it. It also has better textual manuscript evidence than any other ancient work. Whereas classical greek works may only have 3 or 4 copies that may be 1000 years or more removed from their writing, the Bible had thousands of copies much closer to when they were written as well as translations.
Don’t believe everything you are told. There is a lot of baloney taught about the Bible that is based on circular reasoning and starts out with not believing miracles are possible, therefore when the bible speaks of miracles it had to have been written afterward or fabricated or something. They can make it all sound so scholarly except that the only basis for it is their lack of belief and imagination.
Investigate for yourself. Many who have set out to write books debunking the Bible have instead been convinced of its reliability!
Great, Matt. So women must pay for humankind’s sins through painful childbirth?!! And I guess that means that men get to ride for free? For all those who believe in the literal translation of the bible, I have a bridge to sell you.
Kudos to the Professor, he is diplomatic.
In schools, we should not just teach biological evolution but also art history because through art, the fabrication of Judeo-Christianity comes to light. Judeo-Christianity morphed from other religions and through the years, the monks feverishly worked and massaged the fables that people sheep come to think as gospels. Islam which came 600 years later was smart, it banned any drawing/art of the human form. Reason was Muhammad a hideous syphilitic cripple.
Must say though, these religious books are creative. As a kid, though, I only read these books for my sex and violence fix. Sex and violence define modern religions of Judaism, Christianity & Islam. These people’s God must be one horny devil.
Lula, you need to do a little research instead of believing all the anti-bible garbage you were taught. Have you ever considered the basis for it? sure it sounds so scholarly but if you study it, it comes from their unbelief and so they spin a convincing tale about how it all evolved.
And you call those who believe the bible sheep!
OC4truth are you kidding? Please tell me you are kidding…if not, you’ve been behind the Orange Curtain for far too long. Time to come out of your religion-created shell and see the world in a new light. Time to think on your own for once instead of blindly following every single thing you hear from the local Mega-Church
Matt, you have proved that we all did not evolve from monkeys. You obvioulsy came from a rock. The bible is a series of stories told around camp fires not absolute truth. In the name of religion and God more people have been killed and mamed than by any other cause. Wake up
Dr. Ayala’s reseach and career are both remarkable and lead the way for discoveries that change and improve our lives for the better. God gave us minds to improve our lot not to go back to when we lived in caves.
Matt, avoid rock piles, you may see your ancesters there.
Hey Jerry sounds like you have more faith than whatever Matt has. Common Evolution is an entertaining fairy tale. Nothing more. If it were true we’d have a missing link.
Jerry, you are almost right with your faith though. There is evolution. Its called horizontal evolution. For example, one species of bird, found on one island with a short blunt beak. That same species of bird found on another island with a slightly longer conical beak. This is common in animals and humans. What is uncommon or non-occuring is vertical mutations. Lizard-bird, gorilla-dog, etc.
The idea of evolution is based on the assumptions that “natural selection” and “genetic mutations” are both random (or in other words, without a direction), and drive organisms to evolve from low complexity to high complexity (or in other words, with a direction). These two are certainly contradictory if evolutionary scientists dare to think about it. We, as human being, all live with a purpose, or at least, search for the purpose of life. Do you really believe that the sense of such purpose was “evolved” through random events? Some scientists argue that such “directional guidance” come from the “mother nature”. Do you buy that ?
Prof. Ayala said that God’s attribute of omini-potent contradicts his observation that “the design of human being” was not perfect. He hinted that the evolution was to be blamed. So was God behind this evolution or not? If yes, Is God “a bad designer” of evolution? If no, then who is behind the “evolution”? His argument did not make sense at all !!!!!
If we read the first book of the bible, we know that the whole world, including the earth, was in the curse after human sinned. All the diseases and genetic mal-functioning started and got worse by time.
True science does not contradict the true region. Psuedo science does!
His argument will make sense if you just read carefully at what Dr. Ayala said. His comments about design flaws and God are directed at the Creationists and Intelligent Design people ! ! ! Ayala’s message was/is that ID/creationist is bad science and worse religion since it will expose that God is a bad designer, hence not omnipotent. Science and evolution will have not such confusion since defects or flaws in life are assigned to be the result of natural processes not an ominipotent being.
Another BIG MISTAKE in your comment is to say that “evolution is based on the assumption that natural selection and genetic mutations are both random……….. blah blah blah”. Selection and mutation are only two of the different mechanisms involved in the evolution of life. With that you have demonstrated your knowledge of evolution stopped in the early part of the 20th century and the arguments between Darwinian and Neo Darwinian scientists. That is assuming that you have any idea of what evolution says and you are only parroting some sermon from your pastor-rube-in-chief.
And anything else you said is nonsense religious propaganda and the useless dribble espoused by religious rubes debunked decades ago! Go troll somewhere else.
Dear fourthgeneration:
thank you for the colorful reply. I did know a lot about biology and human evolution, more than what you think. I published a paper in Science, two in PNAS, two in AJHG, and 2 in Genome Research, etc, all top journals.
You are still young and think you know a lot from reading science books or your little life experience. I am kind of surprised to see that you “hate” pastors. I want to know who or what has offended you.
Keep Jesus in your mind. You will need Him when the time comes.
Hey USC Professor–reveal your identity. Anyone can go on this blog and write whatever as long as they are hiding behind the shield of anonymity–oh but you know some journals, well let see, I have published in PNAS, Nature, Science, Cell, etc etc–you are as vacuous as your comments.
I see, in my imagination, the moment that religion was created. A dad and his offspring were sitting around the fire and the kid starts asking the dad a bunch of questions about the natural world for which the father had no answers. “Why is this way”? “Why is that way”?
Rather than look totally stupid, myths were created to help explain away all the stuff that is mysterious.
How much easier it was for dad to put all that off on a diety, who works in mysterious ways, than to have a “scientific” explanation based on interpreting collective knowledge.
Science, is relatively new, in the human experience. How we look at the natural world has evolved as much as we have. The way in which the human thought process is ordered and structured to engage in scientific investigation is recent, in real terms. Developing a hypothosis, experimenting, recording results, etc. all pretty much depended on being able to have written language.
As you said, In your imagination and that’s just what it is. Try reading the Bible which tells us what happened–really. It also is very reliable. People have scoffed for many years but the scoffers keep being proved wrong. Archeology keeps verifying what used to be scoffed at in the Bible.
There is also fulfilled prophecies. There were many about Jesus coming and birth including that he would be born in Bethlehem and all sorts of other details there were fulfilled. With others still to be fulfilled in the future.
Don’t just imagine or believe what you have been taught. Really investigate for yourself. People often ridicule Christians for believing, but yet skeptics seem to be very gullible about believing what their professors tell them about the Bible. Ayala makes a number of very wrong statements about faith and creation.
The Bible is reliable and can stand to be studied but most don’t bother. They just accept what someone else, maybe a teacher or others have told them and have never investigated for themselves.
The Bible does not contradict actual science and many things that people think is says such as flat earth are wrong. They are things that religious people believed, but not what the Bible actually says.
In addition, the central message of the gospel is so simple that a child can understand and yet there are depths in the Bible that a lifetime of study will never plumb. I’ve been at it for over 50 years and am still learning new things.
You state many a generality.
1) Shroud of Turin turned out to be a fraud
2) Story of Moses & Jewish slavery wishful thinking … in fact, Moses, who was treasurer at the time, was a thief who stole money from the Pharaoh and escaped with his lazy a$$ bandits who didn’t want to do honest days work. Pyramids were built by paid laborers not slaves.
3) Abraham’s existence is questionable
4) the Jews during Roman period were the Islamo-terrorists of their day
5) early Christians were vicious thugs who murdered, destroyed, raped and pillaged
Sorry, but just about everything you have written here provides the reason for your ridicule. It’s the kind of thing that makes you one of the “Sheeple.”
Just because Ayala studied to be a priest does not mean that he knows what he is talking about. He says intelligent design in contradictory to those who believe in an omnipotent and benevolent God.
Then he makes a bunch of nonsense statements saying the human head is too large for the birth canal. Sure in some cases there are problems but hey, most of us were born and down through the ages people were born naturally.
He also ignores what the Bible has to say about creation and the fall of man when man turned away from God. Things changed. Deterioration set in, etc. So he creates religion or intelligent design or creation according to his own image rather than what is actually taught. So he is shooting down a straw man.
There is a definite conflict between Darwinian evolution which has things starting out with single celled creatures evolving up to man vs the Bible that says that God created all, including Man. So he is flat out wrong in his basic premises.
And contrary to what many have been led to believe, the fossil evidence does not prove evolution. Darwin himself predicted that within 100 years all the missing links (not sure if that was the term, but that all the missing pieces from the beginning to the present) would be found. Well they haven’t been.
We often hear about a so called missing link. Actually there are many. In fact there are huge jumps around what they call the Cambrian period such that they try to explain it with such things as punctuated equilibrium, but many don’t accept that.
And its interesting that they use bogus “proofs” for evolution such as the moths in Britain who changed color. Oh, but then when they cleaned up the buildings they changed back to lighter colored ones being predominant. Or finches beaks, etc. Sure those are evidence for natural selection, but the moths were still moths and the finches were still finches.
Some guy even tried to use the evolution of cars as a proof! Really!
What Darwin predicted really has no bearing on whether or not evolution is true. You also are clearly not aware that Darwin did predict the discovery of genetics, when he claimed there must be a biological mechanism by which natural selection takes place.
There are transitional fossils within the Cambrian explosion fossils. For example, there are lobopods (basically worms with legs) which are intermediate between arthropods and worms.
Other “missing link” transitional fossils include:
Haasiophis terrasanctus is a primitive marine snake with well-developed hind limbs. Although other limbless snakes might be more ancestral, this fossil shows a relationship of snakes with limbed ancestors. Pachyrhachis is another snake with legs that is related to Haasiophis .
The jaws of mososaurs are also intermediate between snakes and lizards. Like the snake’s stretchable jaws, they have highly flexible lower jaws, but unlike snakes, they do not have highly flexible upper jaws. Some other skull features of mososaurs are intermediate between snakes and primitive lizards.
Runcaria, a Middle Devonian plant, was a precursor to seed plants. It had all the qualities of seeds except a solid seed coat and a system to guide pollen to the seed
A bee, Melittosphex burmensis, from Early Cretaceous amber, has primitive characteristics expected from a transition between crabronid wasps and extant bees
http://www.talkorigins.org
Shall we continue?
Are there really still people that believe evolution is not true? That just stuns me. We have about a million times as much evidence for evolution as we do for gravity, which we hardly understand at all, yet no one questions gravity or suggests it is a supernatural force.
Creationism is not a theory. It is magic. Intelligent Design is not a theory because it has no evidence supporting it and cannot be used to make any sort of predictions about the natural world. It is a perspective founded upon ignorance and a way to sound like you are smart even though you really just believe in magic. Evolution actually predicted the existence of genetics (Darwin believed there had to be a biological mechanism that accounted for the changes brought about by natural selection but sadly did not live long enough to see the discovery of DNA).
The funniest of the lot here are the people asking why there are still monkeys around if humans evolved from monkeys. I guess they don’t understand that evolution does not support or state the idea that humans evolved from monkeys, but rather that at some point in the “recent” past, monkeys and humans shared a common ancestor, that has long become extinct.
You look like a complete idiot when you deride something you clearly do not understand.
The Templeton prize is and always has been a joke. Religion and the supernatural have explained nothing of value to humanity, illuminated no mysteries of our universe, or created anything of great value.
Throughout all of human history, every time a supernatural explanation for an unexplained phenomenon has been suggested, it has lost out to a natural explanation once the mechanism behind that phenomenon has been discovered. Not once has the supernatural explanation ever won out over the natural. It is batting a big .000. I’ll throw my lot in with the guys batting 1000.
Failboat? …
Have you ever wondered WHY nobody has ever published a Book
called “The Undisputed Transitional Forms of Evolution” ???
It’s because of the FACT that there is NOT one single undisputed
transitional form of ANYTHING to be found in this World !!!
Don’t try to overplay your cards …….
Because it makes you look like a Joker!
Facts for you regarding “missing link” transitional fossils:
Haasiophis terrasanctus is a primitive marine snake with well-developed hind limbs. Although other limbless snakes might be more ancestral, this fossil shows a relationship of snakes with limbed ancestors. Pachyrhachis is another snake with legs that is related to Haasiophis .
The jaws of mososaurs are also intermediate between snakes and lizards. Like the snake’s stretchable jaws, they have highly flexible lower jaws, but unlike snakes, they do not have highly flexible upper jaws. Some other skull features of mososaurs are intermediate between snakes and primitive lizards.
Runcaria, a Middle Devonian plant, was a precursor to seed plants. It had all the qualities of seeds except a solid seed coat and a system to guide pollen to the seed
A bee, Melittosphex burmensis, from Early Cretaceous amber, has primitive characteristics expected from a transition between crabronid wasps and extant bees
This is the tip of the iceberg.
Sounds consitent to me:
“Again I saw that under the sun the race is not to the swift, nor the battle to the strong, nor bread to the wise, nor riches to the intelligent, nor favor to those with knowledge, but time and chance happen to them all.”