The Galli Report: 09.17.21

Moving beyond Darwin. Catholic Biden and abortion. How about a minimum salary? Nutrition wars. Photos of really tiny things.

Moving Beyond Darwin
Here is a look at an old book, biologist James Bell Pettigrew’s Design in Nature (1908), about which the author concludes, “A century on from its publication … Design in Nature holds up not only as an unsurpassed survey of biological form, but as a provocative modern inquiry into the causation of form.”

Pettigrew was not a fan of Darwin’s theories:

Man is not in any sense the product of evolution. He is not compounded of an endless number of lower animal forms which merge into each other by inseparable gradations and modifications from the monera up to man. . .

He is the highest of all living forms. The world was made for him and he for it. . . Everything was made to fit and dovetail into every other thing. . . There was moreover no accident or chance. On the contrary, there was forethought, prescience, and design.

The book’s argument is based on Pettigrew’s biological research and his long fascination with the ubiquitous spirals found in nature. I’d appreciate GR readers who know something about this man or spiral research to briefly get the rest of us up-to-speed—not to me personally, but in the comments section please.

Whether this argument holds scientific water, I do not know. That being said, I’ve long doubted that evolution and survival of the fittest adequately explain the natural world as we know it. I do not doubt that they both tell us something true; it makes sense that the earth has a long, long history, and that species have adapted and changed, and that sometimes survival of the fittest is a reasonably good explanation for some of the species that remain. But I also see instances that can’t be explained so easily, and other instances of remarkable coincidences in nature where “chance” doesn’t cut it. 

And a lot of times I suspect facts are shaped to fit the theory: For example, it is said that in one species of birds, feathers are colorful to attract mates, but another’s are dull to camouflage them from predators—and yet both are said to explain why the particular species survived. The explanations I read in natural history museums often feel less like science and more like propaganda.

To reiterate: I have no qualms about the larger picture Darwin revealed to us, nor the many scientific advances it has enabled. I’m just not convinced it tells us everything, or even the most important things. I present this article not because I sign off on every detail of Pettigrew’s argument, but mostly because I find the man and his book fascinating--a reminder that there is more to the history of our planet and its inhabitants than popular science imagines.

Comments—Thanks!
Which reminds me: thanks for the comments about mandatory vaccinations and masks. Most left comments in the comment thread, but a few still sent me personal emails with their thoughts—and a lot of those were great. Unless you don’t want your views known publicly, I’d encourage you to share your thoughts in the comment section of the newsletter.

Catholic Biden and Abortion
This topic will increasingly take up space in the media, which means it will be misunderstood by most journalists as to what is exactly at stake. Which means I’ll keep coming back to it now and then.

Catholic bishops are not pressing the issue—that is, asking Biden to abide by Catholic teaching or recuse himself from taking Communion—because they want to “weaponize the eucharist.” Secularists have little appreciation of doctrinal integrity and church discipline, especially when the doctrine in question is something they question. At any rate, the Catholic bishop of Santa Rosa, California, explains clearly what is at stake for the Catholic Church.  He also reminds us, referencing a previous piece by the bishop of New Orleans, that this isn’t the first time bishops have had to insist that Catholic political leaders live the faith in the public square.

How About a Minimum Salary?
A radical experiment in capitalism is apparently working. At least so far. As the title of the article explains: “CEO on why giving all employees minimum salary of $70,000 still ‘works’ six years later: ‘Our turnover rate was cut in half.’”

Nutrition Wars
Despite the mountains of studies, evidently we still don’t know very much about what makes for a healthy diet. Such is the argument of “The Food Wars: Vitamins or whole foods; high-fat or low-fat; sugar or sweetener. Will we ever get a clear idea about what we should eat?” It’s this week’s long read. For someone like me, who has for decades looked for the perfect diet to keep my waist in check, it was refreshing in its honesty (that is, in not trying to sell me on a new nutrition theory). I also like one of the conclusions:

Aaron Carroll, a physician in Indiana and a columnist at The New York Times, argues that people spend far too much time worrying about eating the wrong things. “The ‘dangers’ from these things are so very small that, if they bring you enough happiness, that likely outweighs the downsides,” he said in 2018. “So much of our food discussions are moralising and fear-inducing. Food isn’t poison, and this is pretty much the healthiest people have even been in the history of mankind. Food isn’t killing us.”

Then a day later I read another longish nutrition piece that made precisely the opposite argument, and it also made sense: “How a ‘fatally, tragically flawed’ paradigm has derailed the science of obesity.”

So, pick your poison. Or your healthy diet. I’m for Keto myself.

Pictures of Really Small Things
I hate titles like “The Best Photos Taken Through Microscopes Will Blow You Away.” But sometimes it’s not just clickbait. Enjoy.

Grace and peace,

Mark Galli