1 Evolution. The mere mention of the word conjures up images either of the workings of the natural world or of propagandist materialism in people’s minds. To put it into perspective, the contrast is between changes in allele frequency over time and observed speciation, and science force-fitted into personal belief systems. Alleles are alternate characters in genetic material and are integral to the process of speciation. Microevolution is the changes in allele frequency within a species, whereas speciation is macroevolution and alleles are not exchanged between populations under natural settings. The difference in allele frequency grows the further back in time the search for a common ancestor extends. The molecular clock, with its neutral proteins, is related to this process and the timing of the chimpanzee, gorilla and human split has been estimated through analysing the amino acid sequence differences of the protein albumin. The creative process of evolution is complex and installs a sense of wonder.

2 Research papers dealing with various evolutionary theories are the result of field research by genuine scientists who possess a solid grounding in biological and social sciences. Before being published, these papers undergo peer-review. Peer-review means that a scientist’s paper, submitted to a journal, is referred to their panel of anonymous reviewers. They recommend any changes to be made to the content and comment on whether the writing contained within the paper is of acceptable scientific standard. The reviewers cannot veto publication based on whether they agree or disagree with the content of the argument(s) presented, although they can submit such recommendations in their report to the journal. However, the procedural aspects of higher scholarship, unfortunately, are not in themselves evidence that higher scholarship is free of bias. Even when opinion does not intrude outright on the reviewing process, reviewers often decide that the weight of evidence makes untenable a view that later research shows to be true, and tenure decisions and funding often flow from such judgments. What is really significant about peer review is not that it is free of bias, but that it is selfcorrecting over time.

3 Scientists utilising an evolutionary framework can date when mutations occurred, track them in time, determine their selective value, study their effects on the rest of the system, understand how these changes in particular organisms stimulated changes in other organisms in the ecosystem, and conduct experiments to understand the processes and outcomes of other ecosystems. In other words, evolutionary science observes the existence of genetic mutations and natural selection in operation.