More Secular Darwin Dogma from a Tenured College Professor - My Responce to a NY TImes Op Ed

The Following is my response to an annoying anachronistic 1950s material determinism secular paradigm "talk" by a typical tenured American college professor - that is no longer valid in a quantum universe as well as the fact that even though Darwin's theory is pretty solid - there are still holes that need filling as in valid scientific proofs that have yet to materialize. The link to the NY Times Op Ed article is below - followed by my response and some links I provided to back up my arguments.

http://nyti.ms/Yrj7pX

Dear Mr. Barash,

I was amazed that you actually think that all the new scientific findings have reinforced many of your old archaic arguments that disregard anything that questions Darwin dogma or lends itself toward old theories like complexity - which could now be referred to as Intelligent Design (ID). I feel you have not kept up with a new wave of brilliant young and old scientists and thinkers who humbly admit their ignorance to the big questions like where consciousness comes from or what happened before the Big Bang.

Brilliant people such as Freeman Dyson and Roger Penrose - two of several Quantum Dynamics founding fathers and Dr. Francis Collins - Human Genome Project Co-Chair - have allowed for a greater source or mystery and are able to do great science as well. Then there are very progressive iconoclasts thinkers like Cambridge's Rupert Sheldrake (biologist) with his Morphic Resonance hypothesis, Physics Professor Amit Goswami at Eugene U of Oregon with his top down East meets West perspective, or pop guru Deepak Chopra MD (biologist) with his similar concepts on pure consciousness being the core of life itself and NYC educator Christopher Meesto Erato's Sto-ology philosophy bridging the gap between the sacred and secular - is a new incredible scholarly work with 800 references/500 links to peruse. These are just a few (check out links below) of the new thinkers who are open minded enough and sharp enough to see the weakness and contradictions in the materialist determinism paradigm that has dominated science for too long. The Western reactionary swing to extreme secularism post the Enlightenment makes sense based on the dark history of the Catholic and Protestant churches. 

Darwin theory is pretty solid but there are gaps and yet unexplained fits and starts in the evolution of species theory. Weak concepts such as Stephen J. Gould's (obviously your hero)  Punctuated Equilibrium, which does a good job describing the mystery but offers no solid causes. But the cracks are widening based on new science - quite the opposite as you say in your 'talk' you give to your young impressionable students. Your talk is no longer acceptable, especially considering the scrutiny of ridiculous weak theories such as Hamilton's Inclusive Fitness coming under fire by giants such as Harvard's E.O Wilson because the numbers don't add up and additionally what has been recorded in the field since 1960 by scientists using new tech such as camcorders displaying altruistic behaviors in nature among st animals of different species never mind third cousins - completely opposing Hamilton's core concept - relegates his long dominant hypothesis in biological evolution theory to the dustbin of history. 

Then there is the overwhelming amount of new evidence supporting some kind of intelligent design as in symmetry on every level from the micro to the macro. The fine delicate balance of the 4 known forces that allow for life as we know it. Our Goldie Locks position in this solar system. Many now believe math itself to be pre-existing before human's discovery like electricity. The fact that I need to write a long email to you in WA where you teach - tenured I am sure - and that the out of touch editors at NY Times printed your op ed - annoys me frankly. Professors such as yourself make me think tenure is not a good thing. The evolution of thought continues with or without you. I suggest you check out some of the links below (Deepak vs Dawkins etc) and catch up on what's going on out there. Paradigms do not go easy but it is time to open the dialog about the holes in Darwin's theory. The burden of proof is now on the old guard (bio-materialist/determinist) to back up these weak aspects of the overall Evolutionary Adaption theory with real science.

http://www.dissentfromdarwin.org/scientists/ 

http://www.amazon.com/Sto-ology-Metaphysical-Exploration-Human-Condition-ebook/dp/B00L6MFTC0/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1412025881&sr=8-1&keywords=sto-ology

http://www.sto-ology.blogspot.com/2014/08/pradigm-shifts-in-evolution-theory.html

http://www.sto-ology.blogspot.com/2014/08/intelligent-design-freeman-dyson-golden.html

http://discovermagazine.com/2009/sep/06-discover-interview-roger-penrose-says-physics-is-wrong-string-theory-quantum-mechanics#.VBiwww1iDmd.blogger

http://www.sto-ology.blogspot.com/2014/09/kleibers-law-more-proof-for-intelligent.html

http://www.sto-ology.blogspot.com/2014/09/dangerous-ideas-excellent-dialogdebate.html

http://www.sto-ology.blogspot.com/2014/08/excellent-deepak-chopra-essay-on-sf.html

http://www.sto-ology.blogspot.com/2014/08/new-discoveries-in-plant-communication.html