When 1 plus 2 does not equal 3

When i started this blog i thought it best not to open the pandora's box of evolution, intelligent deign, creation etc. Google tells me there are already 227 million web pages that mention evolution, and i doubt that i have anything new to add. However, recently i attended a seminar by Ross McKenzie, in which he noted the following.

Distinctions about evolution:
1. Microevolution (Small changes occur over time within a species. Directly observable in the lab.)
2. Macroevolution (New species arise over long periods of time. Cannot be observed directly, but substantial indirect evidence.)
3. Philosophical Darwinism (Life arose as an accident and has no purpose.)

He points out that scientific validity of 1 or 2 does not imply that 3 is valid. Some scientists (who see human life as nothing more than replicating DNA) propose that there is a logical progression. Up-tight christians (that don't really understand science) say that because 3 is not true, therefore 1 and 2 can't be true. Hence the apparent conflict between "science" and "religion".

I think it's important that we remember that (as wonderful as science is) it is not philosophy. Science cannot explain the purpose or meaning of things, and definitely cannot tell us what is ethical, of value, or just. When Professor Peter Doherty (Nobel Prize winner) was interviewed last year, he said it continued to surprise him that there remained "a lot of confusion" about science and religion. In his words:

Scientists can be very arrogant, and religious people don't often get what science is. But being a committed Christian and being a scientist is not mutually exclusive.