Reply to comment

This didn't go on the first time so I'm trying again. :)

Ernst Mayr's book "What Evolution Is" is discusses the overwhelming evidence that supports the theory of Evolution. He includes in this evidence, the fossil record, genetics, and morphological similarities. He presents the information as matter of fact with a bias toward the existence of evolution. His argument is one-sided and does not include the possible cons. As a firm believer in evolution, I am not saying his presentation is by any means wrong, however, it lacks a possible counter argument. Maybe there isn't one.
In chapter 3, The Rise of the Living World, Mayr discusses what happened at the beginning of until the present world dominated by mammals. He gives an in depth discussion as he transitions from lower organisms to higher organisms. His transitions are so logical and clear in a stepwise fashion that it would be impossible to imagine anything other than evolution taking place.
Mayr obviously does not believe that there are no truths, or more specifically, no truths in science. When Mayr is discussing very briefly the views of a Creantionist, he states that, "we still treasure these stories as part of our cultural heritage, but we turn to science when we want to learn the real truth about the history of the world" (Mayr p. 5). Therefore in essence, Creationists tell stories, while scientists tell the truth. Which is directly the opposite of what we are learning in class.