So you believe in evolution..

[Cyberman]

I realise this is backtracking somewhat but I really wanted to address this little nugget before you guys chew all the fun out of our new toy:

You're admitting here that you just assume apriori that life happened on its own and don't consider any alternatives. It reminds me of this quote:

we take the side of evolutionary science because we have a prior commitment to materialism. it is not that the methods..of science somehow compel us to accept a material explanation..on the contrary..we cannot allow a divine foot in the door.

richard lewontin
harvard professor of zoology and biology

From your context and wording you're clearly trying to present Professor Lewontin's words in an anti-evolutionary, even anti-religious light. This is not surprising since those words are featured very prominently on many creationist websites, articles and blogs. However, whenever I smell horseshit I don't automatically think there's a unicorn somewhere around, and whenever I see a carefully mined quote I want to visit the mineshaft and see the excavation marks for myself. So a little digging unearthed this fascinating little titbit, which I shall present in its entirety so as to forestall any excuses for not clicking this link:

Quote

"We take the side of science in spite of the patent absurdity of some of its constructs, in spite of its failure to fulfill many of its extravagant promises of health and life, in spite of the tolerance of the scientific community for unsubstantiated just-so stories, because we have a prior commitment, a commitment to materialism. It is not that the methods and institutions of science somehow compel us to accept a material explanation of the phenomenal world, but, on the contrary, that we are forced by our a priori adherence to material causes to create an apparatus of investigation and a set of concepts that produce material explanations, no matter how counter-intuitive, no matter how mystifying to the uninitiated. Moreover, that materialism is an absolute, for we cannot allow a Divine Foot in the door." (Answers in Genesis)

"The materialist way of thinking has widely creeped into the natural sciences until it became the predominating paradigma. The American geneticist Richard Lewontin aptly voiced that this is an unsubstantiatable preliminary decision: It is not that the methods and institutions of science somehow compel us to accept a material explanation of the phenomenal world, but, on the contrary, that we are forced by our a priori adherence to material causes to create an apparatus of investigation and a set of concepts that produce material explanations, no matter how counter-intuitive, no matter how mystifying to the uninitiated. Moreover, that materialism is absolute, for we cannot allow a Divine Foot in the door." (Gitt)

Original Quote

"With great perception, Sagan sees that there is an impediment to the popular credibility of scientific claims about the world, an impediment that is almost invisible to most scientists. Many of the most fundamental claims of science are against common sense and seem absurd on their face. Do physicists really expect me to accept without serious qualms that the pungent cheese that I had for lunch is really made up of tiny, tasteless, odorless, colorless packets of energy with nothing but empty space between them? Astronomers tell us without apparent embarrassment that they can see stellar events that occurred millions of years ago, whereas we all know that we see things as they happen. When, at the time of the moon landing, a woman in rural Texas was interviewed about the event, she very sensibly refused to believe that the television pictures she had seen had come all the way from the moon, on the grounds that with her antenna she couldn't even get Dallas. What seems absurd depends on one's prejudice. Carl Sagan accepts, as I do, the duality of light, which is at the same time wave and particle, but he thinks that the consubstantiality of Father, Son, and Holy Ghost puts the mystery of the Holy Trinity "in deep trouble." Two's company, but three's a crowd.

Our willingness to accept scientific claims that are against common sense is the key to an understanding of the real struggle between science and the supernatural. We take the side of science in spite of the patent absurdity of some of its constructs, in spite of its failure to fulfill many of its extravagant promises of health and life, in spite of the tolerance of the scientific community for unsubstantiated just-so stories, because we have a prior commitment, a commitment to materialism. It is not that the methods and institutions of science somehow compel us to accept a material explanation of the phenomenal world, but, on the contrary, that we are forced by our a priori adherence to material causes to create an apparatus of investigation and a set of concepts that produce material explanations, no matter how counter-intuitive, no matter how mystifying to the uninitiated. Moreover, that materialism is absolute, for we cannot allow a Divine Foot in the door. The eminent Kant scholar Lewis Beck used to say that anyone who could believe in God could believe in anything. To appeal to an omnipotent deity is to allow that at any moment the regularities of nature may be ruptured, that miracles may happen."

Comment

Answers in Genesis makes it appear as if by "patent absurdity", Lewontin means evolution, when he is really talking about astronomy.

Gitt makes it appear as if Lewontin thinks that materialism cannot be justified and is a personal decision. But in reality Lewontin gives a reason just after creationists stop quoting him.

Also, many scientists will disagree with him in the detail creationists are emphasizing, and say that methodological naturalism is a necessary component of science, giving exactly the reason Lewontin gave.

(All non-cosmetic emphasis as per original).

In short, the quote you gave formed part of a review of Carl Sagan's book The Demon-Haunted World and nothing to do with evolution; second, just as with that other favourite mined quote, Darwin's "absurd in the highest degree" which I look forward to seeing again before too long, the quote you gave actually goes on to continue the point beyond the point you ended quoting; third, the quote is quite clearly edited with the insertion of the word 'evolutionary' and ellipses indicating omitted words.

Bottom line: no matter what your reference sources are, they are lying to you.