Frozen Evolution. Or, that’s not the way it is, Mr. Darwin. A Farewell to Selfish Gene.

The third motivation of opponents of the theory of evolution could be disagreement with the specific starting points or conclusions of this theory.In this case, it seems worthwhile to attempt to materially argue with the objections against the validity of the theory of evolution.If for no other reason, then because these rational arguments are one of the best ways of organizing one’s own thoughts and a correctly formulated, perhaps even malicious question can contribute substantially to the development of any theory.(I admit that I myself came upon the hypothesis of frozen plasticity (see IV.9.2) when writing a review of the anti-evolutionary book “Darwin on Trial” (Johnson 1996).)In a great many cases, it is found that the opponent based his opinion about the theory of evolution on untrue information obtained from quite unreliable sources.These sources of disinformation can consist, e.g., in material disseminated by organized opponents of evolution in an attempt to spread their own opinions, or books whose authors quite justifiably anticipate the commercial success of works questioning the validity of the theory of evolution or the starting points of methodical approaches of science in general.

However, it must be borne in mind that the objections of opponents with any motivation whatsoever mostly pretend that they were instigated by the existence of material disagreement of the theory of evolution with the actual facts.Little success can be anticipated from an attempt to convince a person, who is actually defending his own ideological model of the world, or a person who considers the theory of evolution to possibly be correct, but in any case dangerous or harmful for society in its consequences, of the factual correctness of the theory of evolution.