Creation vs.. Evolution

Creation vs. Evolution

    According to the results of several Christian writers, Christian Scientists, teachers on Bible prophecy, Evolutionist writers, and even Evolutionist scientists, it is apparent that the topic which I have chosen to write on is very controversial. Not only is it controversial, but it is rather hard to understand. The “Theory” of Evolution, which is already accredited with more than it is worth just by simply calling it a theory, is no longer a simple idea. Evolution has taken over in areas such as geology, biology, anthropology, astronomy, chemistry, and etc. In this research paper I am going to give you a very non biased view of both sides, as well as my opinion as to why I believe creationism is right. I will do this by taking an evolutionist standpoint to show the flaws of evolution, showing scientific research for both sides, and pulling out and showing contradictions for both sides along with my opinion as to why those contradictions exist.
    According to the theory of Creationism as a whole, a perfect being, bound only by his own will, created the entire universe, including the earth that we live on, the people that live on this earth, and every animal and plant that is living on it as well. While that may be the basis of the creation of this earth, creationism is taken so much further than just that. Some people believe that if this “God” really did create the universe like we believe, then the Bible must be true. The Holy Bible consists of 66 books: 39 in the Old Testament and 27 in the New Testament, written by a total of 40 different authors all “supernaturally” inspired by the supreme being God. In the first book of the bible, Genesis, we read that “ In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth” (Genesis 1:1, 1). This passage agrees with the creationist state of mind, assuming that creationist actually believe what they teach. So if this passage agrees with the belief and teachings of creationist, then maybe the rest of the Bible will agree too. If you read a little further with a creationist state of mind, you will realize that the entire book of Genesis goes right along with what creationist believe. So for this to be true, the Bible can be considered a book of truth to all people who believe in creationism. The problem comes in when you start trying to prove creationism. According to Robinson, “….there are easily over 100 broad religious groups, and over 1 billion people who do not profess any religion.” (1). The definition of religion is as follows: religion is any specific system of belief about deity, often involving rituals, a code of ethics, and a philosophy of life. So in order to prove creationism, one can not say “Hey, why don’t we just take a look at the bible? It states it clearly right here in the book of Genesis!”. If you state the preceding statement, you are guaranteed to get laughed at. If someone doesn’t believe in the bible, you can not use It to prove creationism! So that leaves Creationist puzzled and looking for another option. So let us take a look at scientific evidence and see how it relates to the bible. Hal Lindsey, the world’s best known bible prophecy teacher and author of seventeen books on prophecy, writes in one of his latest books “ Earthquakes continue to increase in frequency and intensity, just as the Bible predicts for the last days before the return of Christ. History shows that the number of killer quakes remained fairly constant until the 1950s – averaging between two to four per decade. In the 1950s, there were nine. In the 1960s, there were 13. In the 1970s, there were 51. In the 1980s, there were 86. From 1990 through 1996, there have been more than 150” ( Planet Earth 2000 A.D. 87). What do earthquakes have to do with proving the bible? Well, according to a number of Christian writers and teachers on Bible prophecy, Jesus predicted that a pronounced increase in the frequency and intensity of earthquakes would occur just prior to His return to the earth. This coincidence of Jesus’ prophetic statement and recent seismic events is viewed by these writers and teachers as not only a clear demonstration of the nearness of not only the return of Christ, but proof that the bible is fact. During the late 1950’s, during road construction in south-east Turkey in the Euphrates Valley, many tombs contain the remains of Giants were uncovered. At two sites the leg bones were measured to be about 120 cm’s, or 47.24 inches. Joe Taylor, Director of Mt. Blanco Fossil Museum in Crosbyton, Texas, was commissioned to sculpt this anatomically correct, and to scale, human femur. This “Giant” stood some 14-16 feet tall, and had 20-22 inch long feet. His or Her finger tips, with arms to their sides, would be about 6 feet above the ground. This stumped evolution Joe Taylor, but came as no surprise to creationist. Anyone with the ability to read and the will to read the bible would view this as another proof of the bible. In Deuteronomy 3:11, Moses wrote that “…the Iron Bed of OG, King of Bashan, was 9 cubits by 4 cubits”(Deuteronomy 3:11 ?). In everyday language, this means that Og would have been approximately 14 feet long by 6 feet wide! That is the exact dimension of this to scale drawing that Joe Taylor drew up. Further proof of “Giants” can be found in the book of Genesis: “There were giants in the earth in those days; and also after that, when the sons of God came in unto the daughters of men, and they bare children to them, the same became mighty men which were of old, men of renown.”(Genesis 6:4 ?). While these are two very good, dependable arguments, creationist tend to have a problem sticking to the truth. Even the people who fight the war of creation vs. evolution every day tend to have a problem sticking to the same beliefs. Some creationist claim that Darwin recanted on his deathbed, but we know that it is almost certainly not true, and there is no corroboration from those who were closest to him—even from Darwin’s wife Emma, who never liked evolutionary ideas. Also, even if it were true, so what? If Ken Ham renounced the Bible, would that disprove it? Some creationist also say that the Moon-dust thickness proves a young moon. For a long time, creationists claimed that the dust layer on the moon was too thin if dust had truly been falling on it for billions of years. They based this claim on early estimates—by evolutionists—of the influx of moon dust, and worries that the moon landers would sink into this dust layer. But these early estimates were wrong, and by the time of the Apollo landings, NASA was not worried about sinking. So the dust layer thickness can’t be used as proof of a young nor old moon. A argument I have heard quite often is the proof of Joshua’s “long day” (Joshua 10 ?) and Hezekiah’s sundial movement (2 kings 20 ?). Some Creationist claim that NASA computers, in calculating the positions of planets, found a miss day and 40 minutes, which would thus prove the long day and sundial movement of Joshua and Hezekiah. However, this story is a hoax in wide circulation, especially on the internet. This story appeared in Harry Rimmer’s 1936 book The Harmony of Science and Scripture. Not only is this story mathematically impossible, but history disproves it too. There are several other creationist arguments which are the reason for the large debate. Creationist can not get there stories straight, and can not agree on what they believe. So many evolutionist base there beliefs not on proof of evolution, but disproof of creationism. Creationist tell stories like the ones mentioned earlier, only to be proved wrong and demote creationism, forcing another belief. None the less, you have now been presented with the basics of creationism along with a few arguments that creationist may use in order to prove creationism and the bible, in turn proving the book of genesis which restates the belief of creationism. In this next paragraph, I will explain the basics of evolution just as I have done with creationism.
    In biology, evolution is defined as “The changes seen in the inherited traits of a population from one generation to the next”. These changes cause populations of organisms to alter over time. What this means to Evolutionist is that everything in the world today has evolved over time. Evolutionist claim that in the beginning, there was an earth. How the earth was created is a whole argument within itself; Some evolutionist say God created the earth just like creationist believe, while others believe in a widespread theory known as the “Big-Bang” theory. On this planet earth was a single cell organism. Over billions of years, that single cell organism went through several stages. It evolved into a higher form of a land animal, then into a water animal, then back into a land animal, all the way up until monkeys were produced. Monkeys lived on earth for millions if not billions of years, and then humans were evolved into what we are now. Evolutionist claim that we will one day evolve into another higher being, and humans will be non-existent. Charles Darwin introduced this theory of “Evolution by means of Natural Selection” in his book The Origin of Species, published in 1859. In this book he claimed that the similarities of Monkeys and Humans was incredibly close. He states that “…monkey DNA and human DNA are so closely related that approximately 97% of the DNA strands match up when combined.” (Darwin 132). This theory is so overwhelmingly established that it is considered to be a topic creationist do not want to touch, which makes it a very good argument for any evolutionist. The most popular way of proving evolution is to disprove creationism. There are only two theories right now as to which is right, even though there are several sub-categories under these two main theories. If you can disprove creationism, evolution is obviously the only option left, so evolutionist and creationist alike use this strategy as a means of proving there own beliefs. Evolutionist often attack the bible, because if the bible is not right, the book of Genesis is not right, and creationism is disproved. Evolutionist often claim that if there were a loving God like creationist claim, then why is there suffering in the world. If God wants us to all enter the kingdom of heaven, why does he allow evolutionist to exist and prove his non existence? The sad part of these arguments is that creationist back down to them. Creationist can not back up there beliefs, especially to people who attack the bible and do not believe it. A recent study, according to http://www.religioustolerance.org/ev_publi.htm, showed that 95% of scientist’s believe in some form of evolution, while only 5% believe in creationism. If someone asked me to name the top 3 smartest job categories in the world from one to three, I would have to say scientists, engineers, and republican presidents respectively. So if scientists are considered to be some of the smartest people in the world, and 95% of them believe in evolution, why would we not believe in it? Creationism comes to a point where it just doesn’t make any sense. You can not back it up scientifically, you back down every time the subject is brought up, so what do you have to believe in? The only proof creationist seem to have is this book called the bible. What good is that? Well, In this next paragraph, I am going to explain which side I would take, and prove what I have to believe in.

    While I will agree that some creationist are so wrong that I sometimes question my religion, I am still 99% sure that creationism is right, leaving only 1% for some undiscovered truth. I am going to use a common evolutionist strategy by taking the side of evolution and trying to prove it, only to find it impossible to do. As I mentioned earlier, some evolutionist do believe in the same “God” that creationist claim created the earth and everything in it. These evolutionist will even claim that they believe the bible, but just interpret it different. For example, Evolutionist claim that God didn’t create the earth in 6 days, but instead in 6 billion years. They say the meaning for the word “day” does not have to be literal. Ok, that’s fine. Ill agree for now. Lets keep reading the bible. You do not have to look very far before finding a problem with this theory. The bible claims that Noah and several others lived for some 700-900 years. If one day is one billion years, 700 years would be 255,500,000,000 years. That is a long time for a single human to live! So the meaning for the word day must mean more than one thing right? The answer to that is no. In the original Hebrew text, the same word for day is used throughout the bible, and it is apparent that the meaning does not change, whatever you take the meaning as. So that throws out any evolutionist who claims to believe in evolution and the bible. So that leaves one option for the creation of the world. The Big-Bang theory! So there are these two particles of dust floating around in this non-existent space when one day they blow up! They blow up creating 9 planets, earth, the sun, life as we know it, and the entire rest of the universe. Not only is this scientifically impossible, but it is logically impossible too. So that throws out the Big-Bang theory. So ok, you got me. I do not know how the earth was created, but evolution still holds true! So in the beginning, there was a single cell organism. Several billions of years later, it transformed into some form of a fish, then into a land animal. Don’t believe me? Lets prove it! Ok, so take a fish for example. A fish is rather large compared to a single cell organism, and has two eyes and a nose located on the front of its head, has a specific mechanism so it can breathe underwater, and has the ability to eat certain foods underwater in order to stay alive. Now how this fish got this large from a single cell organism, that is a tricky one. But hey, Charles Darwin was a smart guy, right? So anyways, this fish eventually evolved into some form of a land animal. For this to be possible it must’ve been an animal who lived in water and on land, so lets assume it was a frog. So this fish evolved into a frog, with a completely different body makeup. It had 4 legs, a whole different method of breathing, ate different animals, reproduced differently, laid eggs differently, and was even a different size. Now, once again, I really don’t know how all this happened, but I do know I am right! So, by now I’m sure you get my drift. When breaking evolution down and looking at it logically, it is obvious it could not be true by the single cell organism theory. You can even take into account the makeup of a dolphin, with the spout on the top of its head. How did it get up there then back to the human face? No evolutionist can tell you, I promise! So if evolution is not true, why is our DNA so similar to that of a monkey? Well, it is not. This is another common misconception. When Darwin published his book, it was noted that we had a 97% similarity of DNA makeup compared to that of monkeys. A 1991 study by scientist Anthony Abramov showed that our DNA similarity was only 93%. So does not that just further prove evolution? I mean, 93% is still a lot! Sure, why not. Once again, I will agree with that for now. During this study, the DNA similarity of humans and yeast was also compared. A similarity of approximately 1% was noticed. So, at the rate that the DNA similarity is decreasing, Humans would be fully evolved in approximately 3000 years. There are records of humans being around from over 2000 years ago, and they had the exact same physical makeup as we do now. If we were to be fully evolved in 3000 years, do you not think that we would have changed some in the last 2000? Obviously! My favorite example is the comparison of a Porsche and a bug car. These two cars were manufactured by the same company, thus they have some similarities. While they are two totally different cars, they both have the same logo on them, the same air conditioning unit, several of the same components, but they look totally different. There “DNA” is the same, but there appearance is totally different. So when God created humans and animals and everything else, he made us all with some similarity in DNA. Humans, yeast, and monkeys are all different in appearance, but were all created by the same creator, thus causing us to have some DNA similarities. This once again proves creationism and disproves evolution. So what is left? There is not much for evolutionist to stand on when you break there beliefs down and attack them just like they do creationism. Now through all of this, I can not completely discredit the theory of natural selection. While evolution is out the window, natural selection may still exist. When two organisms reproduce, each organism has 4 alleles which can pass through to the offspring. Two of these alleles are dominant in each organism. So what does this mean? Well lets say you have 50 male humans with blue eyes, and 50 female humans with brown eyes. The brown eyes are dominant in the female and blue eyes are recessive, where as and blue eyes are dominant in male and brown eyes are recessive. All 50 couples produce offspring, but every single child that is born receives 2 dominant blue eye alleles from the father and 2 recessive blue eyes from the mother. Then all 100 of the original parents die out, leaving only the offspring they produced. All of these kids have 4 alleles just like the parents, but they are all blue. No matter what kind of combination of parents you make, the kids are guaranteed to have blue eyes because they can receive nothing but blue eyes. So brown eyes are now extinct, and through the process of natural selection do not exist anymore. This however does not prove evolution, but just the process of extinction by natural selection. Nothing evolved, just one “race” was eliminated. 
    In John 3:12 Jesus states the following: ‘I have spoken to you of earthly things and you do not believe; how then will you believe if I speak of heavenly things?’ Let me apply this verse in a particular way—if one can’t believe the earthly things spoken of in the Bible (e.g. the history in Genesis, which encompasses biology, geology, anthropology, etc.), then how can one believe the spiritual things (e.g. morality and the message of salvation) which are based in this ‘earthly’ history? Evolutionist wonder what the missing link is, why nothing seems to make sense. It Is because they cant even believe in the earthly things God gave us, and so can not see the spiritual side that God gave us all. Any evolutionist who goes through the salvation process and becomes a creationist is guaranteed to not turn back, because it is obvious that once you accept that God is real, the creation of the universe and everything else in the bible falls in place. Evolution is so far fetched that one can not even consider it to be a theory. A theory in science means a well-substantiated explanation of data. The evolution conjecture should not be called a theory because this gives it unwarranted respectability by association with the Theory of Relativity, Newton’s Theory of Gravity, the Debye-Hückel theory of electrolytes, etc. All these theories have strong experimental support. In contrast, evolution of life from non-living matter and from one basic type of organism to a different type has not the slightest experimental/observational support.