In response to “Evolution: theory, not fact,” in Feb. 7 edition of Technician.

I write in response to the recent column expressing the indignation of an English major at the treatment of evolution as fact in one of her classes. Evolution is a multifaceted concept; it broaches two broad sets of ideas.

First, the many biological forms on Earth come from different, previous forms, even one common ancestor; and second, various mechanisms, such as natural selection or genetic drift, or perhaps overt design, can account for the development of new forms. On the latter, there is yet much uncertainty as to how and why new species develop—witness the heated debates between Stephen Gould and Richard Dawkins.

On the former, however, the facts are unanimous. There is an unbroken line of genetic material from every cell currently living all the way back to the primordial soup’s prokaryotic tangle as witnessed by myriads of facts from comparative genomics, biogeography and the fossil record. Ms. Murphy can be forgiven if she objects to her professor treating some specific mechanistic idea of evolution, such as selectionism, as true.

However, that cannot be the case if all she objects to is the treating of evolution, as a broad statement of universal common descent, as fact. Evolution, in a form refuting traditional cosmologies, is unwaveringly true. The only possible way one can be free to choose beliefs is if one is ignorant. The knowledgeable biologist does not choose to believe; evolution’s truth is manifest everyday. Perhaps Ms. Murphy should mind her own advice and ”research things for [her]self and make an informed opinion” by visiting Wikipedia’s “Evolution of common descent” or Talk.Origins’ “29+ Evidences of Macroevolution.”

Andy Vargas

senior, material science and engineering