"Creationism" vs "Evolution"

10.14.2002

Evolution and Creationism are the same thing.

You read that right.

Just not the way the "Creationists" believe.

I was flipping through the channels a few nights ago and came across a tv show on a Christian TV station broadcast here in Indiana. I laughed, I cried, I wanted to throw things at the TV as I watched.

Not because they said that God created everything; I believe that as much as they do. The premise is correct; their 'theories' however, leave much to be desired regarding logic or the physical evidence of the Earth and the universe - evidence made available to us by God alone.

Before I continue, let me give you an overview of "Creationism" and "Evolution."

Overview

• Creationism, as proposed by fundamentalist Christian scientists, is the belief that the god Yahweh (a.k.a. Jehovah or 'God') created the Earth, then the Sun, Moon, stars, animals and people around 6006 years ago, in a period of six days (after which Yahweh rested for a day). This Yahweh created the first man by blowing life into some dirt or clay, and created the first woman using one of the man's ribs. Both were immortal and lived in a paradise on Earth. Gen 1-2). However, the two were deceived by a serpent (a snake with four legs) and were talked into breaking a commandment given by Yahweh. When Yahweh realized the two people he had created had broken his commandment, he took away their immortality, expelled them from paradise and cursed the woman and all women thereafter with painful childbirths. Gen 3). After many generations had come to pass the descendents of the man and woman had become very wicked, and after Yahweh had realized his mistake in making the world and mankind Gen 6:5-7), Yahweh, having caused 40 days of rain, destroyed all living land creatures via a great flood that covered even the mountains (the waters of which may have persisted for 150 days). Of humankind, only a man named Noah and his immediate family were spared, having been previously commanded to build a great ship (known popularly as Noah's Ark) and to populate it with one male and one female of every species of land animal (or, in another account, all 'clean' animals had seven representatives). Gen 6:5-8:22). All modern human and animal populations are therefore descended from Noah's family and the two (or seven) representatives of each animal type that Noah and his family collected together.
• Evolution (which comprises both fact and theory, but more on this later) coupled with the independent "Big Bang" theory is the belief that between about 10 billion and 20 billion years ago the universe was created - at least as we now know it - from a cosmic explosion that hurled matter in all directions from a central point in the universe. It is from this exploded mass of material that all objects in the universe originated. Over the billions of years since that time these objects (suns, planets, asteroids, and the like) were formed, changed and morphed as various gravitational and other physical forces have acted upon the atoms and molecules that make up all matter. Specifically regarding Earth, our tiny planet began to form approximately 4.5 billion years ago (about 29 million years after the formation of our solar system) and took approximately 30 million years to form. Then in a circumstance of chance but mathematical probability (given the immensely great number of planets in the entire universe), the exact conditions for the beginning of life were achieved, such as the Earth's distance from the Sun, the temperature of the Earth's core and surface, the temperature and chemical makeup of the oceans, etc. From those humble beginnings of early life then came, through the process of adaptation to new environments (which is called Evolution), more and more advanced and complex creatures, creatures who over billions of years continued to evolve into the forms we know today, including humans. This slow process continues today and will indeed continue into the future.

Discussion

Creationism

Creationism and the theories and evidences of the Creationists, at least those I have come into contact with, have so many holes in them that even *I* can find them.

For example, let's consider the 'evidence' and 'theories' given by the two Creationists in the TV program I watched (mentioned above).

1. They stated that the dinosaurs were just big, or overgrown, lizards. They claimed that these big lizards lived from the time of the Creation Gen 1-2) up until The Flood, or Noachian Deluge (Gen 6:13-7:24). The reason that these 'big lizards' were so big was because, according to their 'theory,' up until the time of the flood there was a protective layer in the atmosphere that kept out more radiation than our current atmosphere, allowing the lizards to grow into the monsters we call dinosaurs, i.e. they simply grew larger than normal. This protective layer, they concluded, was also responsible for the giants that, according to Genesis, lived during those times (Gen 6:13-7:24), as well as the reason that the Old Testament/Torah patriarchs lived to ages numbering hundreds of years.

   First of all, let me make it clear that they offered absolutely NO EVIDENCE for these claims; indeed, they must simply have made these ideas up because there IS no evidence to support such claims, at least that I am aware of!

   Second, there's the fact that there *IS*, however, evidence against their statements - even in the Bible!

   • The Bible gives a COMPLETELY different reason for the existence of the mythical giants they mentioned. Therein it states that "the sons of God" (angels I assume) copulated with ("came in unto") mortal women, and the women thereafter bore children who became giants (Gen 6:13-7:24).
   • Furthermore, at no point does the The Bible state that all people before The Flood were giants. Instead, it shows just the opposite, stating that the "mighty men which were of old, men of renown" were giants and that others felt like grasshoppers in size in comparison to them Gen 6:13-7:24. If a protective layer over the earth was what had caused the giants mentioned in Genesis, then all people living at that time would have been giants, not just men of renown, since radiation from space or any other source would have affected all people in any given geographic region more or less equally. (Remember also, as a side note, that absolutely NO evidence of 'giants' - men who were, as stated above, were allegedly so massive as to make observers feel as small as grasshoppers Gen 6:13-7:24 - has ever been recovered in the thousands upon thousands of archeological sites excavated around the world, including known biblical sites of the Middle East).
   • Moreover, it is interesting that, if dinosaurs lived during the times of Adam, Enoch, Noah, etc., that these huge, monstrous creatures are never mentioned in the Bible. If such beasts roamed the earth at the same time as humankind, wouldn't that have been a pretty big deal to the people living during those times? Wouldn't such monsters as the nearly 18' tall Tyranosaurus Rex (or its Mongolian cousin Tarbosaurus Bataar) - examples of which would presumably have been running around, eating people and being generally unpleasant - have been a big deal and worthy of at least a footnote's worth of information to Moses (the alleged, though proven false) author of Genesis)? Also, if people and lizards were 'big' before The Flood, then why weren't the sheep and cattle affected in the same way, why weren't they giant creatures as well? And yet no fossil, archeological or even Biblical record shows any evidence for such gigantic farm animals.
   • In general, I find it odd that the Bible is filled with mythical creatures such as giants, for which we have no evidence, but not one thing is mentioned about dinosaurs, or even 'big lizards,' for which we DO have evidence.

   Third, the forms of these so called 'big lizards' often have no contemporaries in the modern world. If dinosaurs were simply 'big lizards,' then we'd have miniature Tyranosaurus Rex running about even today. Of course, a few species have survived since the time of the dinosaurs, such as sharks, but these sorts of hold-overs are few and far between AND were of the same or VERY similar shape, size and form then as today...

2. The TV Creationists furthermore stated that The Flood (Gen 6:13-7:24) created all the layers of sedimentary rock where the fossilized remains of dinosaurs and other pre-historic life are found. They also claimed that oil was created at that time as well.

   First of all, remember that all this supposedly happened in the space of the 40 days of the Deluge to the 150 days that the waters supposedly persisted upon the Earth.

   Simply put, the idea that a 40 - or even 150 - day Flood of the earth (even as extreme and impossible as the one related in the Bible) could have created the multiple layers of sedimentary rock that hold the fossil record is totally preposterous - even if The Flood really happened!

   Such a claim and such a theory goes against every geological fact that humankind has ever discovered. If the fossil record had been made due to The Flood, then why aren't the fossils of dinosaurs side by side with (i.e. in the same geological layers as) the fossils of people and other more modern animals? In fact, why is it that when scientests investigate the sedimentary layers which are the farthest down (i.e. the earliest layers of sedimentary rock), which contain fossils and therefore evidence of life during the periods those layers were formed, they find only extremely primitive, single cell life forms? Why, indeed then, do the fossils of dinosaurs and their contemporary animals and plants companions exist only in sedimentary layers that fall between those earliest, most simple life forms and those sedimentary layers in which humankind first walked the earth?

   Now, from Creationists besides these two gentlemen on TV, I've heard the theory that these differing layers, with (only) single celled animals at the bottom, dinosaurs farther up, and people, goats, kangaroos and other more modern animals at the top, was simply due to the various dead animals floating to the bottom of the world wide ocean (created by the flood) at varying rates. However, as interesting of a theory as this is, it (excuse the pun) does not hold water. Anyone who has ever poured dirt and rocks into a bucket knows that the heaviest and largest objects sink into water fastest, with smaller objects falling at a slower rate, and with particulates being actually suspended in the water for a long time. This being the case, if The Flood was responsible for the distribution of the fossil records, we would expect that the largest dinosaurs along with elephants and wooly mammoths would be on the layers farthest down, smaller dinosaurs along with sheep, lions and people farther up, squirrels and rabbits farther up still, roaches, spiders and worms farther up still, and single celled organisms at the very top. But that is simply not the case.

   Indeed, how does this 'theory' explain oil which takes much more time than 40 days to form - at least to my knowledge. If oil could be made in under 40 days, we wouldn't need to drill for oil (or go to war for it), we'd just brew it in factories like we do beer.

   Finally this claim can be refuted by the fact that no evidence has been shown to indicate that the layers of rock in question, supposedly formed by The Flood, were formed any differently than any of the more recent layers of sediment - they're just older and have, due to time and pressure, become sedimentary stone.

3. The TV Creationists also claimed to have 'evidence' that fossils do not take as long to form as scientists say they do. Their two peices of evidence were a 'fossilized' dill pickle, which had been recovered from an old cellar containing home-canned foods, and (a picture of) a 'fossilized' leg, foot and boot of a 'cowboy.'

   First off, these specific evidences are dubious since they have, I'm only guessing, never been investigated by legitimate scientists. Because of this, however, my refutation of these evidences is only an educated guess on my part because nobody besides these TV Creationists have, to my knowledge, been able to double check these peices of evidence or the conclusions made by the owners of these artifacts (i.e. the TV Creationists).

   By reading between the lines of the few facts I was given by the Creationists on their little TV show, it is very likely that these two items (the pickle and 'cowboy' leg) are both a form of aptly named 'false fossils.' In particular, more modern animals and plants can become mummified or coated in travertine (calcium carbonate salts from springwater), giving the appearance of being fossilized. This effect could easily explain the 'fossilization' of both items. The pickle might be explained by the fact that pickles are made by immersion over time in a salt and vinegar solution, often with many other spices and minerals thrown in for flavor - over a long period of time, a pickle in such a solution, as the liquid in the solution dried up, would likely absorb the salt and other solids in the pickling solution and, therefore, become very stone-like. Similarly, the cowboy's leg, foot and boot, if buried and exposed to nature, may simply have been coated in travertine from a spring water source, giving the appearance of its being fossilized (though, quite honestly, in the picture they showed of this peice of evidence, the 'fossil' simply looked like a plastic skeleton leg and foot inside a torn up but still rather nice looking cowboy boot). Again, though, without proper scientific experiments on these objects this explanation is only a theory, or educated guess, on my part.

   And besides, even if fossils only took a day to form, this doesn't rule out all the other evidence that help scientists determine the age of a fossil or other geological/acheological finds. Other evidence includes multiple methods of radiometric dating and stratigraphy-based relative chronology (in which the layers of sedimentary rock that hold the fossil and archeological recoard are examined and compared using superposition, association, and cross-dating techniques).

4. Another evidence against the Biblical account of The Flood is from Genesis, which states "Fifteen cubits upward did the waters prevail; and the mountains were covered. Gen 7:17-20). Now, just for reference, 15 Cubits is about 23 feet (7.2m). The height of the tallest mountain, Mount Everest, is just over 29,000 feet (8850m). The discrepency here is readily apparent and needs no pointing out. Because of this discrepency, however, either the flood didn't cover the mountains, or the Biblical account is inaccurate as to the height of the waters. Unless I'm missing something, either way the account is discredited by this single contradictory statement, likely written by an individual who had never seen a mountain, much less measured one.

   I recognize that it could be (weakly) argued that perhaps mountains weren't as tall before The Flood, but then they wouldn't be called mountains. A 25 foot tall hill does not a mountain make - especially if everyone were giants! :)

 

Evolution

While the Big Bang theory might never be proved (at least in our lifetimes!), the fact or fiction of the Big Bang has absolutely no bearing on the facts and theories of Evolution. Furthermore, it is important to note that evolution is both fact and theory.

1. The fact of evolution is that, simply stated, things evolve. Any person can easily observe this in the world around them.

   For an easy example, domestication is a form of evolution, brought about by the actions of humankind. The various types of domesticated plants, such as corn and wheat, and domesticated animals, such as cows, sheep and dogs, have all evolved into the forms we are familiar with today because of domestication, the process (intentional or otherwise) of selective breeding. Dogs, for example, are really domesticated wolves, selectively bred for thousands of years into their current forms for the various breed's abilities to help us hunt, or herd animals, or simply be our companions, respectively. And yet despite the outward changes and abilities, they are still genetically and reproductively compatible with wild wolves! Beyond the domesticating techniques of our ancestors, however, today we have even begun to be able to domesticate (and evolve) plants and animals at the genetic level, choosing and manipulating the specific genes of a plant or animal to fit specific needs or desires (to enlarge the size of a plant's vegetable growth, for example).

   Domestication is not the only factor which influences evolution, however. It is simply the most dramatic and easy to see. The fact is that ANY sort of environmental factor, including climatory changes, isolation (on an island, for example), predatory stress (i.e. being hunted), and disease, can cause long or short term evolution to occur in a species. This is not just the idea of the survival of the strongest, but often it is the survival of the quickest, the hardiest, the smartest, the trickiest, or just the luckiest. Simply put, those specific creatures who are able to survive, for whatever reason, in a given environmental condition are thereafter able to pass on their genetics to the next generation, who are therefore at least as likely to survive in that environmental condition so as to pass on their genetics. Over time, this environmentally-selected swapping of genetic codes has caused variation in the fossil and archeological record, and is causing such variation among living species that we can observe, study and record today.

   You can even see this by observing modern man, even by observing your own family. In many respects, you probably look quite a bit like both your father and your mother. However, you are a unique person - nobody has ever looked exactly like you. Now, when you have a child with someone, that child will look something like you, and something like your mate, and yet, like you, your child will be completely unique. Your child is an evolutionary member of the human race, having evolved from your and your mate's ancestors into a completely unique being.

2. The theory of evolution, on the other hand, is that humans and animals have evolved from earlier forms of life. Basically, the theory of evolution is based on the fact of evolution (see above) coupled with the evidence given by the geological/archeological record, which shows that anatomically modern humans appeared sometime around 100,000 years ago, but that other very human-like creatures lived and evolved for millions of years before that. In short, since animals and plants, including humans, do as a matter of fact evolve, then it is simply more likely that anatomically modern humans evolved from these earlier, human-like forms than it is that anatomically modern humans just popped into existance about 100,000 years ago - at about the same time that the other human-like forms disappeared.

According to Bernard Grant Campbell, "No evidence presently known either falsifies or undermines the theory of organic evolution." As I stated at the beginning of this article, I believe that "Evolution" and "Creationism" are the same thing. I believe that God created the Earth, the solar system, indeed the entire universe - just not in that order - and I believe that evolution is the vehicle by which God created mankind as well as every other organism on Earth. I do not believe, and have absolutely no cause to believe, that God created the Earth in six days (or, indeed, that he had to rest on the seventh!), or that he made a 'mistake' which he had to eradicate with a world wide flood. Instead, based on the facts as the Creator has given them to us, I believe that the structure of the universe and the processes of nature here on Earth and throughout the universe are the only True Testaments of the wisdom and might of the Creator that we need or have been given.

What it really comes down to is, in regards to the structure of the universe, the age of the Earth and stars, and the like, who do you believe? Do you believe in the anonymous writings of religious fanatics who have been dead for thousands of years, who believed that the Earth has four 'corners' ( Isaiah 11:12, Revelation 7:1 ). that there is a 'firmament' called heaven between the waters of the earth and the 'waters above the firmament' (where rain supposedly comes from, I imagine Gen 1:6-9 ). Or do you believe in the scientific discoveries of the sort of people who can, to the minute and even second, predict earthquakes, solar eclipses, and the arrival of comets, and who can discover and invent things that continue to truly benefit humankind?

Indeed, give me a dime along with all the true discoveries and inventions made using the knowledge provided by religious myth, and I can buy a peice of bubblegum.

For the general viewpoint of Anthropologists on this subject, see AAA Statement on Evolution and Creationism.

Agree? Disagree? Think I'm full of it?
Email Me

Copyright © 2010 By Bob Curtis