Modern Darwin: Dr. Martinez J. Hewlett
Martinez Hewlett is an emeritus professor in the department of Molecular and Cellular Biology at the University of Arizona in Tucson, Arizona. He has published 30 scientific papers and a novel, Divine Blood (Ballantine 1994). He is a founding member of the St. Albert the Great Forum on Theology and the Sciences at the University of Arizona. He serves as an adjunct professor at the Dominican School of Philosophy and Theology at the GTU. He is co-author, with Ted Peters, of three books on evolution: Evolution: From Creation to New Creation (Abingdon, 2003), Can You Believe in God and Evolution? A Guide for the Perplexed (Abingdon, 2006), and A Theological and Scientific Commentary on Darwin's Origin of Species (Abingdon, 2008).
On why he feels it is important to discuss evolution today.
"Why is it important to discuss evolution today? If we take progress in the biological sciences seriously, from basic understanding of the world around us to applications in the field of human medicine, then a clear understanding of what biological evolution is and what it is not becomes critical. So much of the so-called "war" between science and religion over the issue of evolution is based upon mistaken notions of what the Darwinian model means."
Dr. Hewlett's View of the Key Moments in Evolution
1. The decade in the 19th century from 1859 to 1869. Three events took place during this period which, at the time, were not thought to be related: Darwin's publication of Origin of Species in 1859; Mendel's publication of his work on heredity in pea plants in 1868, and Meischer's discovery of nuclein, which is DNA, in 1859. By the middle of the 20th century these three things come together in the neo-Darwinian synthesis, the underlying paradigm of modern biology.
2. The challenge of intelligent design. This modern rediscovery of the so-called "design argument," originally defended by Reverend William Paley in 1802, and now championed by scientists such as William Dembski and Michael Behe. This seemingly scientific, but basically flawed approach has been alluring to many non-scientists looking for a compromise position in the debate.
3. The Human Genome Project. The culmination of the molecular paradigm in biology actually brings about a deep philosophical restructuring of the field. Molecular biology has given way to systems biology as the best explanatory model for living systems at all levels of organization.
No TrackBacks
TrackBack URL: http://ngccommunity.nationalgeographic.com/admin/mt-tb.cgi/5513
Recent Blog Comments
- I'm not so sure I believe... on 9/11 Science and Conspiracy Director's Diary
- Top international scientists have proven beyond... on 9/11 Science and Conspiracy Director's Diary
- I happen to watch this documentary... on On pursuit to film an extraordinary story in India - Part 2
- I just read Daddy's story. He... on HAPPY 40th BIRTHDAY, Cesar!
- Happy Birthday Cesar. I love your... on HAPPY 40th BIRTHDAY, Cesar!
Monthly Archives
- August 2009 (12)
- July 2009 (16)
- June 2009 (20)
- May 2009 (5)
- April 2009 (10)
- March 2009 (10)
- February 2009 (12)
- January 2009 (14)
- December 2008 (6)
- November 2008 (9)
- October 2008 (7)
- September 2008 (10)
- August 2008 (10)
- July 2008 (19)
- June 2008 (14)
- May 2008 (11)
- April 2008 (16)
- March 2008 (13)
- February 2008 (14)
- January 2008 (16)
- December 2007 (11)
- November 2007 (15)
- October 2007 (12)
- September 2007 (12)
- August 2007 (11)
- July 2007 (3)
- June 2007 (10)
- May 2007 (7)
- April 2007 (4)
- March 2007 (9)
- February 2007 (5)

2 Comments
Of intelligent design: "This seemingly scientific, but basically flawed approach has been alluring to many non-scientists looking for a compromise position in the debate." I am tired of hearing that intelligent design is a position for non-scientists. To the contrary, here is a short list of highly respected scientists who support intelligent design or Biblical creationism, along with a sample of their credentials:
Jonathan Wells, Ph.D. in molecular and cell biology from UC Berkely; Ph.D. in religious studies from Yale Graduate School; senior fellow of the Discovery Institute's Center for Science and Culture
Stephen Meyer, Ph.D. in history and philosophy of science from Cambridge University. He has spoken at symposia at Cambridge, Oxford, Yale, Baylor, the University of Texas, and elsewhere.
Robin Collins, Ph.D. in physics from the University of Texas in Austin; Ph.D. in philosophy from the University of Notre Dame. He has spoken at symposia and conferences at Yale, Concordia, Baylor, Stanford, and elsewhere, including a plenary address at the 2003 Russian-U.S. conference on "God and Physical Cosmology" held at Notre Dame. Served as a postdoctoral fellow at Northwestern University.
Guillermo Gonzalez, Ph.D. in astronomy from the University of Washington in Seattle. Assistant professor at Iowa State University; member of the International Astronomical Union and the American Scientific Affiliation.
You listed Michael Behe, but here he is anyway. He holds a Ph.D. in biochemistry from the University of Pennsylvania. He has served on the Molecular Biochemistry Review Panel of the Division of Molecular and Cell Biosciences at the National Science Foundation. He has also authored several dozen articles for such scientific journals as DNA Sequence, The Journal of Molecular Biology, Nucleic Acids Research, Biopolymers, and Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences USA.
J.P. Moreland, Ph.D. in philosophy from the University of Southern California. After earning a degree in chemistry from the University of Missouri, he was awarded the top fellowship for a doctorate in nuclear chemistry at the University of Colorado, but declined.
Walter Bradley, Ph.D. in materials science from the University of Texas at Austin. A professor of mechanical engineering at Texas A&M University for twenty-four years, served as head of the department for four years. A fellow of the Discovery Institute's Center for the Renewal of Science and Culture, and also of the American Society for Materials and the American Scientific Affiliation. Author of The Mystery of Life's Origin, a devastating critique of naturalistic origin-of-life theories, with forward by Ph.D. biophysicist Dean Kenyon (author of Biochemical Predestination), who called the book "cogent, original, and compelling."
Allan Sandage, Ph.D. in stellar evolution from the California Institute of Technology, where he studied under Walter Baade. He is perhaps the greatest observational cosmologist in the world. He has served on the staff of the observatories at Mt. Wilson, Palomar, and the Carnegie Institute of Washington; discovered the quasar; and has been called "the grand old man of cosmology" by the New York Times. For a list of awards, see here http://phys-astro.sonoma.edu/brucemedalists/Sandage/index.html
Once again, this is only a sample. So please, Mr. Chapman and Mr. Hewlett, please stop trying to make out opponents of evolution to be incompetent in science.
audi_alteram_partem writes: "To the contrary, here is a short list of highly respected scientists who support intelligent design or Biblical creationism, along with a sample of their credentials"
Dear Mr/Ms Audi:
Anybody who decides that Biblical creationism is the real thing is already at a severe disadvantage of being discredited. Possession of a branded or non-branded Ph.D and dozen publications is no measure of the ability to use skills rationally.
Please humor and clue me: what is so special about the Bible creation myth that makes its version "true", as compared with the Hindu/Buddhist creation metaphors, which has much more plausible content? After all, the Hindu creation metaphor has Brahma's day and night closer in time to the age of the universe, whereas the Bible creation myth has an untenable 7 days. My suggested reading list for your esteemed Ph.Ds: "Super continent" and "Nature's clocks".
What is that special thing about the Bible that makes it "more true" than the Bhagavatgita, where Bhagavan Krishna reveals that He is the source, beginning and end of all creation?
What scientific measures will you or "Discovery"-Institute use to discredit Bhagavan Krishna, and claim that Yahweh's creation is the real thing, and that Bhagavan Krishna is a shameless plagiarizer?
I trust that your esteemed Ph.Ds at the "Discovery" Institute have sound reasons for their beliefs, and not dogmatic positions.
Yours,
Raj Vedam, Ph.D.
Add a Comment