Neil DeGrasse Tyson on Disproving God

[Neo-Scholastic]

6. I believe in various parts of evolutionary theory. I don't think common decent has been anywhere near proven.

Have you seen any of the papers from the last Royal Society Conference in London regarding the "extended evolution synthesis"? Royal Society

A lot of recent research is calling into question the neo-Darwinist Synthesis. That is not to say that any of research directly supports so-called intelligent design but it strongly suggests that excluding all teleology from biological systems by fiat is deeply problematic. It also seriously undermines the notion that natural selection and random mutations are the end all be all of speciation.The link goes to a very diplomatic article that carefully avoids directly challenging existing concepts in evolutionary theory so you have to read between the lines and look at the original findings to really get a sense of the controversies.

Here's one pregnant line...

...too much causal significance is afforded to genes and selection, and not enough to the developmental processes that create novel variants, contribute to heredity, generate adaptive fit, and thereby direct the course of evolution. Under this perspective, the sharp distinction between the proximate and the ultimate is undermined by the fact that proximate causes are themselves often also evolutionary causes. Hence, the EES entails not only new research directions but also new ways to think about, and interpret, new and familiar problems in evolutionary biology.

---

1. The New Testament is not evidence because the claims made in the New Testament have not been demonstrated to be true.

I would invite you to reflect on the circularity of that statement.