Evolution And Creation
Ever since the publication of Charles
Darwin's The Origin of Species was
published, there has been an ongoing
debate between science and religion.
Scientists have formulated many
theories as to the origins of man and to the
creation of the earth, whereas
religious groups have one main creation theory,
based on the "Genesis" story
of The Bible. These theories, however,
are not the cause of the debate
because the different theories are simply myths
meant to explain the unknown.
The debate is caused by different belief systems.
The main difference
between creationists and scientists is the way they fight
this debate.
Creationists have developed their own science: Creation Science.
Creation
scientists look to prove that creation is right and science is
wrong,
providing selective interpretations of the fossil record. But
their
interpretations are exaggerated and foolish. Creationists will pick
one
scientific theory and do everything they can to point out it's
flaws,
disregarding what they can't prove wrong. They will often use emotions
to
control the public to their side. They spend their time trying to discover
false
evolution rather than teaching their beliefs to the general public. The
theory
of evolution removes humans from the center of the universe, and
religious
followers can't believe that their God, who created us in his image
(Bible, 2),
would allow that. The creationist arguments can be summed up in
one example from
the Morris -Parker book. They state "Evolution is claimed to
be'scientific,' and still going on, so it seems like it should be observable
and
measurable. Yet after 150 years of intense study of biological
variations,
evolutionists are still completely in the dark about the supposed
mechanism of
evolution. This fact surely is cause for beginning to doubt the
validity of the
very concept of evolution (303)." The use of words such as
'claimed',
'should be', and 'supposed' all are very powerful words, but
they don't give
examples as to where and who claimed or supposed these
things. Nor do they seem
to understand evolution. In 150 years, the
evolutionary change that would occur
is insignificant. It is very difficult
to see such changes in such a short
period of time. They are completely
ignoring the evolutionary timescale. Also,
they don't acknowledge that
biologists have seen evolution occur, in the case of
moth's wings changing
color for protection against their prey . Morris and
Parker are also
blatantly attacking evolution as a science and as a fact.
Evolutionists
mainly spend their time in the debate defending themselves. They
teach the
correct evolution (no, we did not evolve from monkeys). It is at
times
difficult to teach correct evolution to the public because the details
of
evolution can be very technical. For example, saying that evolution is
caused by
molecular variation of mitochondrial DNA throughout periods of
statis and
anastatis in a multigenerational time scheme would confuse and
frustrate the
general public. Perhaps the reason why creation scientists have
so much
influence is because the average American knows very little if any
about science
theories and thought. The public would much prefer emotional
appeal over
technical details. Unfortunately for scientists, most of them
don't know how to
speak emotionally and get their information across at the
same time. Simply
throwing out facts and figures does not make a case. Mirsky
has an example that
may catch the attention of the creation scientists. He
said, "these are
strange times, when a controlled chain reaction of uranium
235 atoms can be used
to convert water to steam in order to drive turbines to
generate electricity
used to provide power to a television set to that a
Jimmy Swaggart can reach a
fallow mind with the news that Earth is really
only a few thousand years old
." Mirsky's clever quote can be spiritless to
religious believers, but he
does make a very good point. Yes, some scientists
use clever slander to show
false creation, but the majority stay well within
the regions of what they know
about. Scientists generally behave differently
when defending their theories to
creationists. Instead of trying to disprove
creation and interest the common
people, evolutionary scientists try to piece
together the past and explain why
we evolve in the ways that we do. Although
both sides of this issue present well
thought out arguments, they are still
spending too much of their time fighting
against each other rather than
furthering their own knowledge. If they stop
criticizing each other and focus
their attention on gathering and processing
information, they could find the
proof that would end this debate. Or perhaps
faith should be kept in the home
and church and true science should be kept in
the laboratories. Because it’s
not likely evolutionists will convince
creationists that evolution is a fact,
and nothing creationists say will change
what evolutionists believe either.
People will believe what they choose.
Religious believers have a tendency
to believe that only their theories can be
correct. Scientists believe their
own theories, but will abandon them if a new
theory comes along with better
evidence to support it. Creationists only have
one source to prove their
theory correct: the genesis story. They believe simply
through faith in The
Bible. Scientists, on the other hand, have an abundance of
fossil skulls,
fauna, and other biological and ecological specimens to prove
that evolution
exists. Scientists work to prove their theories wrong in order to
find the
true answers. The creation science argument has constantly said that
what
they do is use scientific evidence to show that creation happened, but
what
they are really doing is trying to prove evolution wrong.
"Evolution,
properly understood, can only enrich and add to our faith in a
loving, dynamic
creator. Evolution does indeed exist, but only because God
created it." A
major argument is that if evolution is correct, it is purely
an accident. The
scientific claim is that the origin of the universe and
everything within it
just randomly happened. It is suggested that creation
science is a
"controlled accident", using the hand of the creator as
the
controller. However, instead of examining the actual evidence,
creationists
explain the scientific side of the issue by taking small bits
and pieces of
evidence and quotes from scientists to back up their claims.
Within the
scientific group, evolution has been widely accepted as fact. It
exists and has
been proven time and time again with examples such as the jaw
bones of reptiles
migrating over thousands of years into the ear bones of
mammals and the human
anatomy showing that we were once long ago quadrupeds.
Theories are in debate
about the processes of evolution. The only thing that
is being questioned and
has not been proven is the history of species. For
example, human evolutionary
theories have gone through a great history of
change because of new evidence. At
first it was thought that Neanderthals, a
prehistoric human ancestor from
Europe, were part of the lineage that led
to modern humans. Now it is believed
that they are strictly a side group that
became extinct. Discovery of new
fossils more similar to humans but from the
time period of Neanderthals have
made scientists question their original
beliefs, but they don't question
evolution itself. Theories surrounding the
processes of evolution will
undoubtedly continue to change with political
movements and new evidence, but it
will take a lot to disprove evolution
whether it is caused by natural forces or
by some supreme being, it still
exists. "Life on earth-however it began-has
evolved and will continue to do
so, impervious to the carping of member of one
religious sect on one planet
in one minor solar system on the edge of one
galaxy. In order for this debate
to ever end, some common ground must be
reached. Either one theory or the
other has to be ultimately proved beyond the
shadow of a doubt. But, there is
an incredibly small chance of that happening.
Even if it were to happen,
to prove either side, there would still be
disbelievers and those who think
the evidence is a hoax.
Bibliography
Bible, The 1995. King James
Version. Harper Paperbacks, New York. Conroy,
Glenn C. 1997.
Reconstructing Human Origins. WW Norton & Company, New York.
Dawkins,
Richard. 1995. River Out of Eden. BasicBooks, HaperCollins, New
York.
Mirsky, Steven D. 1988. "Standing on the Shoulders of Midgets"
The
Humanist, Jan/Feb 1988(11, 42). Morris, Henry M. and Parker, Gary E.
1987. What
is Creation Science?. Master Books, El Cajon, CA.