But the evolutionists at the National Academy of Sciences, while declaring that evolution is at the basis of our biological sciences, insists on setting vitamin C requirements for humans at a level that is about one-tenth that required by every other mammal or primate studied. Now, what's that all about?
Source please. I believe you are mistaken.
There are other examples of this sort of inconsistency. The theory of evolution insists that population genetical fitness, W, drives all organic progress. But, evolutionists insist that there is some sort of population problem, that can be solved by reproductive restraint, practised mostly by evolutionists. By their own theory, they are naturally selecting themselves out of existence.
Only an idiot believes scientific theories are a basis for morality.
Or take the way they talk about science. Evolution, they will insist, is the best science, but try to find an evolutionist with some sort of understanding of sophisticated scientific methodology, the law of succession, or Bayes Theorem, for example. They will insist on double-blind experimentation, a technique almost impossible to apply to evolution/creation debates, or research supporting evolutionary thinking.
Horses for courses.
™ Version 4.2