Changes

|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=jaV4gLt24HYC&printsec=frontcover&dq=God%27s+undertaker&hl=no&sa=X&ei=r2NpVeCrGabfywP4m4GAAg&redir_esc=y#v=snippet&q=%22evolution%20did%20it%22&f=false

|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=jaV4gLt24HYC&printsec=frontcover&dq=God%27s+undertaker&hl=no&sa=X&ei=r2NpVeCrGabfywP4m4GAAg&redir_esc=y#v=snippet&q=%22evolution%20did%20it%22&f=false

|isbn=978-0-7459-5371-7

|isbn=978-0-7459-5371-7

|quote=It is also very easy to say 'evolution did it' when has not got the faintest idea how, or has simply cobbled up a speculative just-so story with no evidential basis. INdeed, as we have seen, a materialist ''has'' to say that natural processes were solely responsible, since in his or her book, there is no admissible alternative. As an result it is just as easy to end up with an 'evolution of the gaps' as with a 'God of the gaps'. One might even say that it is easier to end up with an 'evolution of the gaps' than a 'God of the gaps' since the fromer suggestion is likely to attract far less criticism than the latter}. ... How can we, then, avoid the charge of intellectual laziness...}</ref> For example, [[Stephen Jay Gould]] admitted his own functionalist biases as he was once criticized by [[Francis Crick]] for hastily attributing a certain phenomenon to evolution, expressed in form of an adaptive story invented with alacrity and agility, even prior to finding out the real mechanism behind it.<ref>{{cite book

|quote=It is also very easy to say 'evolution did it' when has not got the faintest idea how, or has simply cobbled up a speculative just-so story with no evidential basis. INdeed, as we have seen, a materialist ''has'' to say that natural processes were solely responsible, since in his or her book, there is no admissible alternative. As an result it is just as easy to end up with an 'evolution of the gaps' as with a 'God of the gaps'. One might even say that it is easier to end up with an 'evolution of the gaps' than a 'God of the gaps' since the fromer suggestion is likely to attract far less criticism than the latter}. ... How can we, then, avoid the charge of intellectual laziness...}}</ref> For example, [[Stephen Jay Gould]] admitted his own functionalist biases as he was once criticized by [[Francis Crick]] for hastily attributing a certain phenomenon to evolution, expressed in form of an adaptive story invented with alacrity and agility, even prior to finding out the real mechanism behind it.<ref>{{cite book

|author=Stephen J. Gould

|author=Stephen J. Gould

|title=Adam’s Navel

|title=Adam’s Navel