That the scientists’ story is a myth is made clear by Barfield. He would point out that, if the world-picture of modern physics is true, the only thing that is certainly true about the evolutionary story is that it did not occur. For we have no ability to describe what things were like before the existence of phenomenological experience. What is a fish when there is no man around to cast a line? What do things look like without us when color and shape, feel and smell and sound are all within us? This point makes obvious the fabulous character of the evolutionary narrative, which must then be judged on that character. The question becomes: Is it a good story? Not really, to my eyes, too many long stretches without anything happening, boring.
Yet, as a story, it becomes open to interpretation. Not the dryness of, did this happen? but the richness of what does it mean?