Evolution and Creation
Rodger Fickel
COM170
July 7th, 2013
Winifred Winstead Donnelly

Evolution and Creation

For several decades there has been a debate between creation and evolution, and which one should be taught in schools. While many individuals on both sides of the issue wonder why it even matters, it should not be understated how important these topics are for ideas ranging from humanities place in the world, to how antibiotics work. Evolution sits at the very heart of scientific understanding, while creation rests within the realm of humanities spiritual views.

History of the debate.

Evolution, at its most basic level, is the idea that tiny changes over a long period of time will eventually add up. The concept, although not called evolution, dates back to some of the earliest Greek philosophers, such as Anaximander of Miletus who proposed that life began in the ocean and eventually moved onto land. Empedocles (c. 490-430 BC), postulated that what is seen as birth and death is the joining and separating of elements which cause the countless “tribes of mortal things.” The concept of evolution took a bit of a downturn in the early middle ages, resurfacing during the renaissance and eventually leading to the observations of Charles Darwin. Since then scientists have discovered deoxyribonucleic acids, sequenced the human genome, and traced the ancestry of humanity back nearly 200,000 years to a tribe in Africa because of how they have come to understand Evolution.

Creationism, in some form or another, has existed as long as humans have believed in Gods. Ever culture has some form of Creation story. With the rise of fundamentalist Christianity at the turn of the 20th Century, so too came a revival of Young Earth Creationism, in part as a rejection by that movement of Darwin and his theory of evolution. To creationists, one must take an extremely literal view of the Bible. The creation story in Chapter 1 of the Book of Genesis must have happened exactly as stated and therefore anything that suggests otherwise must be false. This includes Evolution because if evolution is true then humans could not have been created as they are by God.

For many years, these two sides have been arguing and while even the Supreme Court of the United States of America has ruled that creation is not a science, Texas school books are printed with it included. Individuals like evolutionary biologist Richard Dawkins regularly speak in support of evolution, and evangelical preacher and founder of Answers in Genesis Ken Ham gives lectures regarding Creation.

What do these two theories explain? The theory of evolution tries to explain two things; adaptability, and the diversity of life. Adaptability can be seen clearest in the microscopic world. Bacteria and viruses. In germ theory, scientists rely on evolution being true. This is because if Evolution were not true, then germ theory as they know it would not work. When germs are exposed to antibiotics roughly 99% of the culture will die. Those that do not die, however, can develop an immunity to the antibiotic, adapting and increasing its resilience. Because of this, there have been several “super-bug” strains that have evolved.

Diversity is adaptability on a larger scale. Evolution predicts that when two groups of the same species over time are separated, they will adapt along different lines. If one group moves into a colder environment, they may develop thicker fur over successive generations while the second group, having stayed where it is warmer may develop thinner fur. As enough time progresses, enough changes will accumulate to make them almost unrecognizable. A good example of this is dog breeding. All modern breeds of dogs are descended from gray wolves. Through successive generations certain traits have been exaggerated while others breed out of the line until there are dogs as different as a Chihuahua from a Great Dane (The Science of Dogs, 2007).

Young Earth Creationism is broader in what it tries to explain. In terms of life, YEC holds that all species were created approximately 6,000-10,000 years ago exactly as described in the Old Testament book of Genesis. Creation predicts that because humans understand that things that exist must have a cause, the same holds true for the universe itself. In terms of this first cause, YEC states that because the universe is so vast and complex that cause must be even more complex than the universe itself. For YEC’s like Ken Ham, this uncaused first cause is God.

Ken Ham also goes on to say that without this first cause, that there is no purpose in life and no morality. Creationists state that God is that purpose and is the only possible source of that purpose. In an article on his website, Answers in Genesis, authors Dr. Georgia Purdom and Dr. Jason Lisle state that without a Creationist world view there is no purpose and no morality in life. They go on to say that if evolutionists cannot account for morality or purpose without God, then they must accept the actions of Hitler, Stalin, or Mussolini as neither moral nor immoral (Morality and the Irrationality of an Evolutionary Worldview, May 13 2009).

What evidence is there?

Evolution usually takes place over long periods of time in more complex organisms such as animals. Because of that most of the evidence for evolution lies in the long-term records such as fossil records, and DNA. The Human Genome Project was a massive endeavor to sequence human DNA, and it provided some compelling evidence. Geneticists have known for a long time that DNA mutates on a fairly regular basis, and this mutation leaves behind a marker. This marker is commonly used to determine paternity, as the markers a parent has will be passed down to the child. On a grander scale, these same markers were used to trace the migration of humans in their current locations, all the way back approximately 200,000 years to a tribe in Africa. As the early populations grew, some left and traveled to more fertile areas. Over time, they adapted to the new environment.

More recently, another piece of evidence came from Russia. In 1986 a nuclear reactor in Russia went critical, spreading radiation over a large area. Many people, animals, and plants died as a result and even today the area around Chernobyl is dangerous to be in. Dangerous for most except for a melanin rich fungus that thrived on the radiation. It was determined that the development of high amounts of radiation in the fungus allowed it to use the ionizing radiation in a similar fashion to how plants normally use chlorophyll in photosynthesis. The fungus evolved an adaptation that allowed it to thrive in a hostile environment.

Creationists rely on logical arguments for evidence, such as Michael Behe’s argument for irreducible complexity. In this argument Behe states that anything which is comprised of certain parts must at all times have those parts. Otherwise, without those systems intact the whole would cease to function. Behe compares this concept to that of a mouse trap, an elegant, simple, and efficient device that if one part is removed then the mouse trap would no longer be a mouse trap. Like the mouse trap, Behe states that complex structures, such as the eye could not have evolved naturally. They must have been designed, and therefore had a designer or creator. (Darwin’s Black Box, 1996)

Another famous argument for Creationism is the Argument for Fine Tuning. This argument states that if any number of specific details were changed in any way “life as we know it” would not exist. Those who use this argument often refer to fundamental concepts in physics, such as N (Ratio of the strengths of gravity to that of electromagnetism) or Lambda (cosmological constant). Others refer to the orbit of Earth, stating that if it were closer to the Sun the Earth would be too hot for life, and if it were any further Earth would freeze.

The difficulty of these two topics is in what people accept as true. While evolution has an apparent preponderance of evidence, creation seems to have sound logical arguments that can be difficult to simply explain away. Between the human genome, germ theory, and canine breeding there is sufficient evidence to accept evolution. However, evolution does not explain morality, purpose, or the apparent fine tuning of the universe. The debate will likely continue, but when one wishes to debate a topic they should arm themselves with knowledge so that they are not arguing blindly.

References
Khajo, A., Bryan, R. A., Friedman, M., Burger, R. M., Levitsky, Y., Casadevall, A., & ... Dadachova, E. (2011). Protection of Melanized Cryptococcus neoformans from Lethal Dose Gamma Irradiation Involves Changes in Melanin's Chemical Structure and Paramagnetism. Plos ONE, 6(9), 1-8. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0025092

National geographic explorer: Science of dogs [DVD]. (2007).

Dr. Georgia Purdom and Dr. Jason Lisle, (2007) Morality and the Irrationality of an Evolutionary Worldview, Answers in Genesis Retrieved from http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles/aid/v4/n1/morality-and-irrationality-evolutionary-worldview

Michael J. Behe, (1996) Darwin’s Black Box, New York: Free Press