Well, they’re right. We humans didn’t come from monkeys or chimpanzees. The genes do prove, though, that we are related. “Related” and “descended from” are two entirely different things.

I also know a couple of people who believe wholeheartedly in evolution, and yet they believe in God above all. They see evolution as God’s tool.

There are many nowadays trying to discredit Darwin. And not all of them are arguing from a religious point of view. Many overlook that Darwin believed in God; he was simply trying to explore the question of how we got to be where we are – not just humans but all life on this planet. They say basically that recent studies in genes and DNA prove him wrong.

How?

True, the study of genes and such can open us to many things we would never know otherwise. But, from what I understand, they’re claiming that there are many holes in human history – which is true – and that appearances of certain elements in our genetical structure, seemingly from nowhere, show that there is no missing link. That’s what I heard, and it makes no sense to me. But wouldn’t those holes in our history be the missing links?

And just because we can’t explain the origin of certain elements within our makeup doesn’t mean that they have no origin. Nor does it mean that they came about through supernatural means. The absence of an explanation means only that you can’t explain it, nothing more.

Our genes can tell us about our genealogy. They can tell us how diverse a species is (the human species isn’t very diverse at all, which gives evidence to the relative youth of our species). But can they tell us about how a species changes according to its environment, food, and such things? Can the genes provide evidence of a religious system? Or what sort of social environment a species has?

I’m also hearing that archaeology is outdated, that genetics reveal our past more than bones ever could. In a way, that is true. But in another way, archaeology can show us what genetics never could. Can cells under a microscope tell us about culture? What sort of culture created those paintings on cave walls? What kind of story does a particular painting tell? What do the stone tools tell us?

And evolution happens through all of this. Art of one generation influences the next; tool-making of one generation influences the next. The young expand on the older techniques. This happens with each generation, until the species as a whole changes fundamentally because of its growth (or regression) in art or technology.

Language and storytelling grow with each generation, and these two are the core of the human condition. Human evolution is nowhere more apparent than in storytelling. It’s through stories that we learn and teach and communicate. If this doesn’t constitute major, fundamental changes in a species over time, I can’t imagine what would.

I am a mix of white and Cherokee from the northwestern tip of South Carolina, USA. I’ve lived all my life with hot summers and cold winters (though rarely have I seen snow). If I moved to spend the rest of my life in, say, the Mid-East, I would change. The air would be different; the food would be different. The community would be almost alien to me. My skin would likely darken; the sun over such a desert region would likely give me more facial lines and such. I would still be me, but I would change.

That’s adaptation. But adaptation is the essence of evolution. And when you apply it to a species or a group over a time span of thousands of years, the change is much more significant. It can lead to a new species, or a subspecies.

The ancestors of the elephant came about in Africa. Some of them branched off into other lands, like Asia. Some, however, wound up in what’s now Russia. (Keep in mind that during this time, there were land bridges between these lands, and the continents were in different places than they are now.)

Russia was a very different land than Africa was. Much colder, for one thing. So this wise old animal developed fur. And now we have the wooly mammoth. It was able to adapt and survive until it became a new animal. No more could it live in the environment of Africa, the land of its ancestors. But toward the end of the last Ice Age, something happened and the mammoth died out. Scientists aren’t sure exactly why, but I believe the mammoth couldn’t cope with the changing environment, a much more significant change than moving from Africa into Russia.

Look at us in just the past fifty years. We’ve gone from a moderate daily dose of media, via television and radio, to a society that ingests media like a hungry wolf ingesting meat. Attention spans have fallen away. The number of people with ADD or ADHD has spiked tremendously in that time. Many schools don’t have an exercise program or anything; at recess, they just walk around and socialize. Our foods have changed; less and less families eat home-cooked meals anymore. We’re still human – we still drive cars and watch baseball games – but we are fundamentally different from what we were fifty years ago.

If you take it back to the early days of the human species, you had homo erectus in Africa. Part of this group branched off and made it into Europe. Another part of this group wound up in Asia before dying out. Those that wound up in Europe, like the woolly mammoth, had to adapt to bitter cold, different foods and environs in general. These developed into the Neanderthal. A new species created – evolved – from the original one.

Of course, some would say that it’s adaptation. Well, adaptation happens when you adapt to changes in your surroundings but you stay basically the same. Evolution happens when the very fundamentals of a species changes.

Natural selection is real. I won’t say it’s what created us; I won’t say it created anything. But it’s real. Either we learn to survive in our environment or we don’t. Those that don’t die out.

Natural selection seems a misleading term, though. I can’t say that anyone (Mother Earth, God, whatever) is selecting anything. But the earth changes; those that can’t cope with those changes don’t survive. And sometimes coping means change.

I often wonder if some of those that oppose evolution are acting not out of religious belief or zealous pride for new sciences, but if they are actually acting out of a basic human constitution: the fear of change.

“Change,” in this case, doesn’t refer to those who like to change their hairstyle regularly or some such. I’m talking about the world. Does anyone want the world to change so that nothing is what we knew before? I don’t think so. It’s scary. But the earth does change. We must change with it if we are to survive. That, to me, is what evolution means.

Evolution isn’t about the better ones winning over others, or the strong prevailing over the weak. I mean, be real: Could direwolves (wolves the size of small ponies) survive now? Sure, they were fine thousands of years ago. But now? The earth changed. Those species here now are those best suited to the change. No more, no less.

And whether we like it or not, the earth will change with or without our consent. It was here before us, and it can survive without us. Evolution calls that basic truth into the forefront. Maybe that’s the real reason why so many people don’t like it.