>>what a physicist or chemist brings to the table on a discussion of Evolution and the theory of natural selection is limited at best
Is this directed at Weinberg? That is what I have always thought too, why is Weinberg, physicist, a leading expert on evolution?
Whether by Darwinism, or other brand of evolution, I find the proponents to be dishonest, and having an axe to grind. It has been relayed that Weinberg, as was Gould, is incredibly anti-religion, in fact there is a story about a seminar Gould was giving in which almost half of the lecture was aimed at ridiculing religious belief,(opposing religous belief appeared to be as important as furthering his ideas on evolution).
Gould is an interesting study in the argument. Gould saw the fallacy in Darwin's argument, he knew it could not work as stated, and developed the theory of punctuated equilibrium. This is an admission of sorts that traditional Darwinian theory had failed.
Punctuated equilibrium is not in that much better of a position than traditional Darwinian theory (lack of physical support), its just that no one has improved on that failed theory yet to replace it.
The wholesale failing of both theories (actually neither rises to the level of theory)is that they cannot account for the initial generation of life. The current pop myth is that lightening struck some clay, which developed the precursors to organism Zero. I hope my tax dollars are not funding this research.
I think it is all akin to the tornado theory as cited above, but add all the complex stuff you want inside, a 747 with a Stradivarius violin, Steinway piano, plasma TV, new Intel Chip, complete work of Shakespeare, and the uncut complete DVD volumes of Ren and Stimpy.
Finally, I like how the proponents of evolution (Darwinian or otherwise) are comfortable to rest in the present, and not preach to the masses that natural selection is going on today, and that humans will continue to evolve through time. They have to if their theory is correct. I want an evolutionist to predict the evolution of man over the next 2 million years, will we become like the giant bigheaded aliens on Star Trek, and use only our brains? Develop gills like Kevin Costner? It would seem to outlandish to make such a prediction, even though it is deadly consistent with and required by evolution.
But perhaps evolution could explain my affinity for roller skating monkeys.